SynthesisAmerican journal of clinical dermatology2026
Evaluating the Performance of Artificial Intelligence in Accurately Detecting Skin Cancer: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.
Synthesis in American journal of clinical dermatology, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence technology is being widely developed in dermatology. However, there remains a lack of comprehensive data analyzing the diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence in skin cancer.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence in skin cancer detection.
methodsMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from database inception to 9 April, 2025. Studies were included if they exclusively assessed the diagnostic accuracy of artificial intelligence for primary cutaneous malignancies. The artificial intelligence performance in skin cancer diagnosis was evaluated using accuracy, area under the curve value, sensitivity, and specificity.
resultsTwenty-eight systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. Across the studies, reported sensitivity ranged from 83.7 to 94.4% for basal cell carcinoma, 57.0-90.1% for squamous cell carcinoma, and 48-100% for melanoma. Specificity ranged from 77.9 to 96% for basal cell carcinoma, 92.6-98% for squamous cell carcinoma, and 36-100% for melanoma. Area under the curve values extracted from the reviews varied widely, generally ranged from 0.61 to 0.99. Narrative comparisons within the included studies suggested that deep learning models frequently demonstrated diagnostic performance non-inferior or superior to human clinicians, although prospective validation in real-world clinical workflows remains limited.
conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that artificial intelligence technologies have demonstrated potential for skin cancer diagnosis, but with important limitations. Variability in diagnostic metrics, driven largely by data heterogeneity and differing validation strategies, poses significant challenges. Emerging evidence suggests future research should transition toward multimodal artificial intelligence systems that integrate structured clinical metadata with image analysis. This will require methodological standardization and validation in real-world settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42189487What 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.