Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41023774›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of emergency medicine2025

Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence for dermatological conditions: a systematic review focused on low- and middle-income countries to address resource constraints and improve access to specialist care.

Olivier Uwishema, Malak Ghezzawi, Nicole Charbel, Shireen Alawieh, Subham Roy, Magda Wojtara, Clyde Moono Hakayuwa, Ibrahim Khalil Ja'afar, Gerard Nkurunziza, Manya Prasad

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Agentic Artificial Intelligence in Dermatology.International journal of dermatology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Olivier UwishemaDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda. uwolivier1@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0692-9027
Malak GhezzawiDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Nicole CharbelDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Shireen AlawiehDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Subham RoyDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Magda WojtaraDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Clyde Moono HakayuwaDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Ibrahim Khalil Ja'afarDepartment of Research and Education, Oli Health Magazine Organization, Kigali, Rwanda.
Gerard NkurunzizaGeneral Medicine Department, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Manya PrasadAll India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative tool in dermatology, particularly in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), where healthcare systems face challenges such as a shortage of dermatologists and limited resources. AI technologies, including deep learning models like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), have demonstrated potential in improving diagnostic accuracy for skin diseases, which contribute significantly to the global disease burden. However, most research has focused on High-Income Countries (HICs), leaving gaps in understanding AI's applicability and effectiveness in LMICs. AIM/

objectiveThis systematic review critically evaluates the application of AI in dermatological practice within LMICs, assessing the performance of AI technologies across diverse geographic regions. METHODOLOGY: The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and included 19 studies from databases including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Eligible studies evaluated AI applications in dermatology within LMICs, reporting metrics like sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by several reviewers using tools like PROBAST and QUADAS-2. A qualitative synthesis as per SWiM guidelines was conducted due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcomes.

conclusionAI shows significant promise in enhancing dermatological diagnostics and expanding access to dermatologic care in LMICs, with models achieving high accuracy (up to 99%) in tasks like skin cancer and infectious disease detection. However, challenges such as underrepresented skin tones in datasets, limited clinical validation, and infrastructural barriers currently hinder equitable implementation. Future efforts should prioritize creating and utilizing diverse datasets, lightweight models for mobile deployment, and human-AI collaboration to ensure context-specific and scalable solutions. Addressing these gaps can help leverage AI to mitigate global health disparities in dermatological care.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceConvolutional Neural NetworksDermatologyDiagnosisLow- and Middle-Income Countries

Identifiers

PMID41023774
PMCPMC12481837

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.