ArticleBMJ digital health & AI2026
Mobile-accessible deep learning-based self-assessment tool for measles screening in low-resource settings.
Article in BMJ digital health & AI, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Measles remains a major global health challenge, particularly in low-resource settings where undervaccination and limited diagnostic tools hinder early detection and response. This study aimed to develop a mobile-accessible, artificial intelligence-based self-assessment tool for measles screening in such settings. Methods and analysis: A dataset of 461 measles and 44 050 non-measles skin lesion images was constructed from journal articles, encyclopaedias, news articles, social media and eight datasets. Images were manually annotated by age group, gender, origin, skin tone, body region and rash colour. A deep learning model was trained and validated across these characteristics, with external validation on four out-of-distribution datasets. The self-assessment tool integrates this model with a symptom-based questionnaire covering clinical features, exposure history and immunity status to generate a risk level and score. Risk scores were calculated using an XGBoost classifier trained on real-world clinical series data. Results: The deep learning model achieved 93.5% accuracy, 93.6% precision and 93.5% sensitivity in detecting measles skin lesions. It demonstrated robust performance across all annotated subgroups, with true negative rates (TNRs) ranging from 79.0% to 92.9% in external datasets. Lower true positive rates were observed for images with Fitzpatrick type IV skin tones (77.8%) and lesions on the upper extremities (80.0%). Lower TNR was noted in children under 5 years of age (67.2%) and for lesions on the torso (68.0%) and neck (71.7%). The tool stratifies measles risk into four levels using a decision-tree framework with follow-up recommendations. The risk score algorithm achieved 91.9% accuracy, 86.4% sensitivity and 95.5% specificity. Conclusion: Our self-assessment tool offers a scalable, cost-effective approach for early measles screening and outbreak management in low-resource settings. Expanding the dataset to include more images from diverse skin tones and regions could further enhance its accuracy and applicability.
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.