ArticleSkin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI)2026
Artificial Intelligence Based Skin Analysis Models for Predicting Visual Grades and Device Measured Physiological Values From Facial Images.
Article in Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-based skin assessment framework capable of predicting both dermatologist-assigned visual grades and device-derived physiological measurements from facial images. In addition, we evaluated the impact of image-acquisition modality (DSLR, tablet, or smartphone) on model performance.
methodsA total of 1,099 Korean participants aged 14-69 years were enrolled. High-resolution facial images were obtained from seven standardized angles using a DSLR camera, and a subset of additional images was collected using a tablet and participant-owned smartphones. Five board-certified dermatologists graded eight facial signs, and physiological parameters were measured using non-invasive skin assessment devices. CoAtNet-4 served as the backbone architecture for both classification (visual grading) and regression (physiological prediction). Model performance was assessed using mean absolute error and correlation analyses.
resultsWhen evaluated using DSLR images, the model achieved a mean exact-grade accuracy of 51.4%, with an average of 93.3% of predictions falling within ± 1 grade across facial signs. High correlations were observed for wrinkles, pigmentation, pores, and sagging, whereas lip dryness demonstrated comparatively lower correlations. For physiological metrics, strong correlations were observed for pigmentation spot count, cheek pore visibility, and wrinkle severity, whereas hydration and elasticity showed moderate correlations. Performance on mobile-device images remained high and showed strong agreement with DSLR-based predictions, although a noticeable decline in pigmentation-related accuracy was observed.
conclusionThe proposed AI framework reliably approximates dermatologist visual grading and multiple device-based physiological measurements, offering a comprehensive, image-driven approach to skin aging assessment. However, model performance varies across facial attributes and remains sensitive to image quality, emphasizing the need for domain adaptation and image enhancement strategies to ensure robust application in consumer environments.
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.