Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Human-AI interaction in skin cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Krakowski, Isabelle; Kim, Jiyeong; Cai, Zhuo Ran; Daneshjou, Roxana; Lapins, Jan; Eriksson, Hanna; Lykou, Anastasia; Linos, Eleni.
Affiliation
  • Krakowski I; Center for Digital Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Kim J; Department of Oncology and Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
  • Cai ZR; Department of Dermatology, Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Daneshjou R; Center for Digital Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Lapins J; Department of Dermatology, Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Eriksson H; Center for Digital Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Lykou A; Department of Dermatology, Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Linos E; Department of Dermatology, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
NPJ Digit Med ; 7(1): 78, 2024 Apr 09.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594408
ABSTRACT
The development of diagnostic tools for skin cancer based on artificial intelligence (AI) is increasing rapidly and will likely soon be widely implemented in clinical use. Even though the performance of these algorithms is promising in theory, there is limited evidence on the impact of AI assistance on human diagnostic decisions. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to study the effect of AI assistance on the accuracy of skin cancer diagnosis. We searched PubMed, Embase, IEE Xplore, Scopus and conference proceedings for articles from 1/1/2017 to 11/8/2022. We included studies comparing the performance of clinicians diagnosing at least one skin cancer with and without deep learning-based AI assistance. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic accuracy with versus without AI assistance were computed using a bivariate random effects model. We identified 2983 studies, of which ten were eligible for meta-analysis. For clinicians without AI assistance, pooled sensitivity was 74.8% (95% CI 68.6-80.1) and specificity was 81.5% (95% CI 73.9-87.3). For AI-assisted clinicians, the overall sensitivity was 81.1% (95% CI 74.4-86.5) and specificity was 86.1% (95% CI 79.2-90.9). AI benefitted medical professionals of all experience levels in subgroup analyses, with the largest improvement among non-dermatologists. No publication bias was detected, and sensitivity analysis revealed that the findings were robust. AI in the hands of clinicians has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy in skin cancer diagnosis. Given that most studies were conducted in experimental settings, we encourage future studies to further investigate these potential benefits in real-life settings.

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: NPJ Digit Med Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country:

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: NPJ Digit Med Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: