A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence versus clinicians for skin cancer diagnosis Review


Authors: Salinas, M. P.; Sepúlveda, J.; Hidalgo, L.; Peirano, D.; Morel, M.; Uribe, P.; Rotemberg, V.; Briones, J.; Mery, D.; Navarrete-Dechent, C.
Review Title: A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial intelligence versus clinicians for skin cancer diagnosis
Abstract: Scientific research of artificial intelligence (AI) in dermatology has increased exponentially. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the performance of AI algorithms for skin cancer classification in comparison to clinicians with different levels of expertise. Based on PRISMA guidelines, 3 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were screened for relevant articles up to August 2022. The quality of the studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. A meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity was performed for the accuracy of AI and clinicians. Fifty-three studies were included in the systematic review, and 19 met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Considering all studies and all subgroups of clinicians, we found a sensitivity (Sn) and specificity (Sp) of 87.0% and 77.1% for AI algorithms, respectively, and a Sn of 79.78% and Sp of 73.6% for all clinicians (overall); differences were statistically significant for both Sn and Sp. The difference between AI performance (Sn 92.5%, Sp 66.5%) vs. generalists (Sn 64.6%, Sp 72.8%), was greater, when compared with expert clinicians. Performance between AI algorithms (Sn 86.3%, Sp 78.4%) vs expert dermatologists (Sn 84.2%, Sp 74.4%) was clinically comparable. Limitations of AI algorithms in clinical practice should be considered, and future studies should focus on real-world settings, and towards AI-assistance. © The Author(s) 2024.
Keywords: review; comparative study; cancer diagnosis; diagnostic accuracy; gold standard; sensitivity and specificity; sensitivity analysis; clinical practice; melanoma; skin defect; differential diagnosis; skin cancer; data base; skin tumor; resident; systematic review; artificial intelligence; dermatoscopy; medical specialist; dysplastic nevus; cancer classification; dermatology; meta analysis; diseases; performance; skin cancers; meta-analysis; dermatologist; clinician; learning algorithm; human; scientific researches; electronic database; preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses; quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies; artificial intelligence algorithms; digital libraries
Journal Title: npj Digital Medicine
Volume: 7
ISSN: 2398-6352
Publisher: Nature Publishing Group  
Date Published: 2024-05-14
Start Page: 125
Language: English
DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01103-x
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC11094047
PUBMED: 38744955
DOI/URL:
Notes: Erratum issued at DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01138-0 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors