Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41411218›Full record

ArticleDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2026

When Jack of All Trades Is a Master of None: Comparing the Performance of GPT-4 Omni against Specialised Neural Networks in Identifying Malignant Dermatological Lesions from Smartphone Images and Structured Clinical Data.

Jiawen Deng, Heather Jianbo Zhao, Jaehyun Hwang, Aya Alsefaou, Eddie Guo, Kiyan Heybati, Myron Moskalyk

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Jiawen DengTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, dengj35@mcmaster.ca.
Heather Jianbo ZhaoTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jaehyun HwangFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Aya AlsefaouTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Eddie GuoCumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Kiyan HeybatiDepartment of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Myron MoskalykSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

<p>Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) can potentially assist in triaging suspicious skin lesions as malignant or benign. General-purpose multimodal large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4o, have not been rigorously evaluated for this task. This study assessed GPT-4o's ability to triage skin lesions and compared its performance to specialised neural networks.

methodsWe evaluated GPT-4o using 1,000 random cases from the PAD-UFES-20 dataset with 50 repeated trials. GPT-4o was tested using clinical data-only, image-only, and multimodal inputs. GPT-4o's performance, consistency, and fairness across different demographic subgroups was evaluated. Its performance metrics were compared against specialised unimodal and multimodal neural networks trained on a separate subset of the PAD-UFES-20 dataset.

resultsGPT-4o exhibited poor triage performance across all modalities, with average balanced accuracies of 0.571, 0.602, and 0.622 for clinical data, image, and multimodal inputs, respectively. Sensitivity was consistently high (>0.95) with the trade-off of very low specificity. Mean agreement rates were high (>0.90); however, Fleiss' κ indicated only moderate consistency due to a strong bias toward malignant classifications. Fairness evaluations showed poorer discriminative performance in younger patients compared to middle-aged and elderly patients but no notable differences between different sex and skin tone subgroups. Specialised neural networks significantly outperformed GPT-4o on most pairwise comparisons. Multimodal inputs significantly improved GPT-4o performance over unimodal inputs.

conclusionAlthough GPT-4o consistently triaged skin lesions with high sensitivity, its very low specificity limits clinical utility. Thus, general-purpose LLMs like GPT-4o are currently unsuitable for clinical dermatological diagnostics without significant field-specific developments and validation. </p>.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceNeural Networks, ComputerSkin NeoplasmsSmartphoneAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityTriageArtificial intelligenceGPT-4oMultimodal modelsNeural networksSkin cancer

Identifiers

PMID41411218
PMCPMC12875639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.