ArticleThe Journal of infectious diseases2026
Diagnostic Accuracy of Commercial Large Language Models for Anogenital Skin Lesion Images: A Comparative Study of Gemini, Claude, and ChatGPT.
Article in The Journal of infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosing anogenital dermatological conditions often requires specialist expertise that is unavailable in many clinical settings. Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly accessible to clinicians, but their diagnostic accuracy for anogenital dermatology has not been evaluated. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of 3 LLMs (Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude Opus 4.1, and ChatGPT 5 Thinking) for anogenital dermatological conditions.
methodsThis study was conducted between September and November 2025, using deidentified clinical images of anogenital conditions from the STI Atlas (stiatlas.org) and other publicly available sources. Primary outcomes were correct classification of images identified as sexually transmitted infections (STIs) vs non-STIs and the inclusion of the correct diagnosis among the LLMs' top-ranked (top-1), top-3, or top-5 differential diagnoses.
resultsAmong 218 images, Gemini achieved the highest accuracy for STI binary classification (76.2% [95% CI, 70.5%-81.9%]) and differential diagnosis (top-1, 39.0% [95% CI, 32.7%-45.7%]; top-3, 54.6% [95% CI, 47.9%-61.1%]; top-5, 60.6% [95% CI, 53.9%-66.9%]), followed by ChatGPT and Claude. In subgroup analysis, all LLMs showed substantially reduced accuracy for diagnostically challenging images (top-5 accuracy range, 29.2%-40.0%). Gemini consistently outperformed Claude across most subgroups (P < .05). None of the LLMs could identify any mpox correctly.
conclusionsLLMs showed limited accuracy for diagnosing anogenital dermatological conditions, particularly for challenging images. The best-performing model (Gemini) achieved only 39.0% for top-1 diagnosis, indicating that current LLMs cannot reliably diagnose anogenital conditions. These tools may support supervised clinical triage but need further validation before routine clinical use. Future studies should compare LLMs with clinicians and explore how they can assist clinical diagnosis.
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.