ReviewSkin health and disease2026
How good are artificial intelligence tools at identifying benign skin lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the specificity of artificial intelligence tools in diagnosing suspicious skin lesions.
Review in Skin health and disease, 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.
- Beyond diagnostic accuracy: evaluating the clinical utility of artificial intelligence for suspicious lesion triage.Skin health and disease · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is a transformative diagnostic tool in dermatology. As the prevalence of skin cancer rises and pressure on health services increases, there is an increasing demand for efficient diagnostic tools. Therefore, it is highly relevant to evaluate the diagnostic abilities of AI tools with a focus on not just the sensitivity, but also the specificity, to reduce unnecessary referrals and skin biopsies for benign skin lesions. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of AI tools in diagnosing benign skin lesions, with a primary focus on calculating the sensitivity and specificity of AI tools when analysing suspicious skin lesions. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on multiple databases, adhering to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies with recorded sensitivity, specificity and diagnosis were included. Nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed. Data extracted included type of AI model used, sample size and important diagnostic metrics. Risk of bias was also assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 (QUADAS-2) framework. Results: Across the included studies, AI tools demonstrated a specificity of 70-95% with a pooled specificity of 82%, and a sensitivity ranging from 65% to 96% with a pooled sensitivity of 89% when analysing suspicious skin lesions as malignant vs. benign. Conclusions: AI tools possess significant potential to streamline dermatological diagnostics, especially in resource-restricted clinical setups. High sensitivity will minimize false negatives, which is crucial for early detection, and high specificity will allow the use of AI tools to autonomously discharge patients with benign skin lesions. However, there is a need for further optimization and training of AI models on more diverse datasets.
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.