Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41836935›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026

Revolutionizing dermatopathology using AI in skin diagnostics: scoping review.

Rawan Rammal, Ahmad Mohy U Din, Tanvir Alam

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rawan RammalCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar.
Ahmad Mohy U DinCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar.
Tanvir AlamCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AI models are becoming is increasingly used to enhance skin disease diagnosis and treatment. This scoping review complies with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and after considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 articles published between 2017 and 2024 were considered. Majority of the publications are published from US and China. Among the selected studies, CNN- and ViT-based AI models were the most commonly used in literature, while LLM-based models (such as SkinGPT and Gemini-based models) appear in recently times more frequently to conduct interactive analysis for users. Recent studies have increasingly featured LLM-based models (e.g., SkinGPT, Gemini), indicating their growth as novel architectures in contrast to traditional CNN and ViT approaches. Among the diseases, the studied mainly covered melanoma, nevi, basal cell carcinoma, keratinocyte carcinoma, seborrheic keratosis, colorectal adenoma, etc. Our research reveals that while AI models excel in diagnosing prevalent and well-documented skin problems, their diagnostic efficacy significantly diminishes for rare or underrepresented diseases, highlighting the necessity for more robust, diversified, and clinically validated models. AI models are often too generic for multiple skin diseases. The studies utilized both private clinical data and public accessible resources, including ISIC and MoleMap. Majority of the AI models need improved clinical validation and regulatory standards covering ethical and legal standards to be considered as a tool for healthcare service providers. Despite these constraints, the reviewed studies indicate that AI models can enhance dermatopathology by increasing lesion classification precision, facilitating early detection, and reducing diagnostic strain; underscoring their prospective significance for clinicians and patients.

Indexed as

AICNNdermatologyLLMViT

Identifiers

PMID41836935
PMCPMC12980796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.