ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Evaluation of GPT-5.2 for melanoma detection across skin tones.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- GPT Fusion: Reasoning-Based Integration of Specialized Convolutional Neural Networks for Melanoma Diagnosis.Research square · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Malignant melanoma (MM) is the most aggressive form of skin cancer, for which early detection is critical and strongly associated with improved survival outcomes. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT and Gemini, present promising opportunities to support melanoma early screening and clinical decision-making. However, despite increasing interest in LLM-based dermatologic applications, their diagnostic reliability across different populations remains insufficiently characterized. In this study, we systematically evaluated the performance of GPT-5.2 across skin pigmentation groups using Milk10K, a clinically curated, publicly available dermatology dataset comprising paired dermoscopic and clinical close-up images with histopathology-confirmed diagnoses and standardized skin tone annotations. GPT-5.2 was assessed on two clinically relevant tasks: binary malignancy discrimination and top-3 differential diagnosis. A balanced subset of 460 lesions (92 per skin tone class) was randomly selected for evaluation. Across both tasks and imaging conditions, GPT-5.2 showed moderate diagnostic performance, with broadly consistent accuracy, F1 score, and Cohen's
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.