Back to Search Start Over

Patient and dermatologists' perspectives on augmented intelligence for melanoma screening: A prospective study.

Authors :
Goessinger EV
Niederfeilner JC
Cerminara S
Maul JT
Kostner L
Kunz M
Huber S
Koral E
Habermacher L
Sabato G
Tadic A
Zimmermann C
Navarini A
Maul LV
Source :
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV [J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol] 2024 Dec; Vol. 38 (12), pp. 2240-2249. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Feb 27.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) shows promising potential to enhance human decision-making as synergistic augmented intelligence (AuI), but requires critical evaluation for skin cancer screening in a real-world setting.<br />Objectives: To investigate the perspectives of patients and dermatologists after skin cancer screening by human, artificial and augmented intelligence.<br />Methods: A prospective comparative cohort study conducted at the University Hospital Basel included 205 patients (at high-risk of developing melanoma, with resected or advanced disease) and 8 dermatologists. Patients underwent skin cancer screening by a dermatologist with subsequent 2D and 3D total-body photography (TBP). Any suspicious and all melanocytic skin lesions ≥3 mm were imaged with digital dermoscopes and classified by corresponding convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Excisions were performed based on dermatologist's melanoma suspicion, study-defined elevated CNN risk-scores and/or melanoma suspicion by AuI. Subsequently, all patients and dermatologists were surveyed about their experience using questionnaires, including quantification of patient's safety sense following different examinations (subjective safety score (SSS): 0-10).<br />Results: Most patients believed AI could improve diagnostic performance (95.5%, n = 192/201). In total, 83.4% preferred AuI-based skin cancer screening compared to examination by AI or dermatologist alone (3D-TBP: 61.3%; 2D-TBP: 22.1%, n = 199). Regarding SSS, AuI induced a significantly higher feeling of safety than AI (mean-SSS (mSSS): 9.5 vs. 7.7, p < 0.0001) or dermatologist screening alone (mSSS: 9.5 vs. 9.1, p = 0.001). Most dermatologists expressed high trust in AI examination results (3D-TBP: 90.2%; 2D-TBP: 96.1%, n = 205). In 68.3% of the examinations, dermatologists felt that diagnostic accuracy improved through additional AI-assessment (n = 140/205). Especially beginners (<2 years' dermoscopic experience; 61.8%, n = 94/152) felt AI facilitated their clinical work compared to experts (>5 years' dermoscopic experience; 20.9%, n = 9/43). Contrarily, in divergent risk assessments, only 1.5% of dermatologists trusted a benign CNN-classification more than personal malignancy suspicion (n = 3/205).<br />Conclusions: While patients already prefer AuI with 3D-TBP for melanoma recognition, dermatologists continue to rely largely on their own decision-making despite high confidence in AI-results.<br />Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04605822).<br /> (© 2024 European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1468-3083
Volume :
38
Issue :
12
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38411348
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.19905