ArticleVeterinary dermatology2026
Artificial Intelligence-Based Identification of Common Canine Skin Lesions From Clinical Images.
Article in Veterinary dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Identification of Common Canine Skin Lesions From Clinical Images.Veterinary dermatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate evaluation of skin lesions is an essential component of dermatological examination, yet it can be time-consuming and subject to interobserver variability. While artificial intelligence (AI) models have shown reliability in diagnosing specific skin diseases, lesion-level identification remains underexplored in veterinary dermatology.
objectivesTo develop and evaluate a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based AI model for the automated identification of four skin lesion types in dogs: erythema, lichenification, alopecia and erosion/ulcer. ANIMALS: Clinical skin images were collected from dogs presented to a veterinary medical teaching hospital. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour EfficientNet models were independently trained, one for each lesion type. Model performance was evaluated by comparing the prediction results with veterinary surgeon-labelled data, using six metrics: accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and F1 score.
resultsAll four CNN models achieved an accuracy of > 90%, indicating a reliable performance across all lesion types. The alopecia model yielded the highest accuracy (98.12%) and F1 score (98.18%). The erythema and erosion/ulcer models exhibited balanced performance across all metrics. For the lichenification model, the sensitivity (87.02%) and F1 score (89.88%) were the lowest among the four lesion types. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The CNN-based AI models developed in this study demonstrated validity in identifying common canine skin lesions from clinical images. These models may facilitate rapid and objective dermatological evaluation, supporting clinical diagnosis and lesion monitoring throughout treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.