Cited by 160Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Deep learning-aided decision support for diagnosis of skin disease across skin tones

Open access
Groh, Matthew, Badri, Omar, Daneshjou, Roxana, Koochek, Arash, Harris, Caleb, Soenksen, Luis R., Doraiswamy, P. Murali, Picard, Rosalind·2024·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Although advances in deep learning systems for image-based medical diagnosis demonstrate their potential to augment clinical decision-making, the effectiveness of physician–machine partnerships remains an open question, in part because physicians and algorithms are both susceptible to systematic errors, especially for diagnosis of underrepresented populations. Here we present results from a large-scale digital experiment involving board-certified dermatologists ( n = 389) and primary-care physicians ( n = 459) from 39 countries to evaluate the accuracy of diagnoses submitted by physicians in a store-and-forward teledermatology simulation. In this experiment, physicians were presented with 364 images spanning 46 skin diseases and asked to submit up to four differential diagnoses. Specialists and generalists achieved diagnostic accuracies of 38% and 19%, respectively, but both specialists and generalists were four percentage points less accurate for the diagnosis of images of dark skin as compared to light skin. Fair deep learning system decision support improved the diagnostic accuracy of both specialists and generalists by more than 33%, but exacerbated the gap in the diagnostic accuracy of generalists across skin tones. These results demonstrate that well-designed physician–machine partnerships can enhance the diagnostic accuracy of physicians, illustrating that success in improving overall diagnostic accuracy does not necessarily address bias.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41591-023-02728-3

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Efforts to leverage generative AI to simulate various skin tones risk exacerbating health inequities and magnifying institutional racism.

    “Although some efforts aim to leverage generative AI to simulate various skin tones (Munia and Al Zubaer Imran, 20256), these approaches also risk exacerbating health inequities and magnifying institutional racism (Groh et al, 2024; Grzybowski et al, 2024; Mikołajczyk et al, 20227).”

    From Artificial intelligence–enabled precision medicine for inflammatory skin diseases (2026) · cites this paper as Groh et al, 2024

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that deep-learning decision support exacerbated diagnostic-accuracy disparities between light and dark skin for non-specialists, supporting the general concern that AI can worsen inequities. But the Main section describes synthetic images made with diffusion models as a potential way to address disparities; the paper does not show that generative simulation of skin tones has this risk or that it magnifies institutional racism. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • AI agents possess the capacity to process extensive patient data, including medical histories, diagnostic test results, and imaging, thereby aiding healthcare professionals in making more informed and precise diagnostic decisions.

    “As shown in Figure 2A, AI agents possess the capacity to process extensive patient data, including medical histories, diagnostic test results, and imaging, thereby aiding healthcare professionals in making more informed and precise diagnostic decisions.62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69”

    From A foundational architecture for AI agents in healthcare (2025) · cites this paper as [65]

    The Results (DLS assistance; page unavailable) report that AI-based suggestions improved physicians’ diagnostic accuracy for skin diseases. But the Discussion describes a constrained, single-image task, not AI processing extensive patient data such as medical histories and diagnostic test results. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Algorithmic bias, particularly related to the underrepresentation of skin of color, continues to limit the generalizability of AI models.

    “Algorithmic bias, particularly related to the underrepresentation of skin of color, continues to limit the generalizability of AI models.”
  • Equitable stand-alone performance may not translate to unbiased human-AI collaboration.

    “Another study64 further revealed that equitable stand-alone performance may not translate to unbiased human–AI collaboration, which is crucial for clinical deployment.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. [42]Buolamwini, J. & Gebru, T. Gender shades: intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Proc. 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency Vol. 81, 77–91 (PMLR, 2018).
  2. [43]Mullainathan S Obermeyer Z Diagnosing physician error: a machine learning approach to low-value health care Q. J. Econ. 2022 137 679 727 PMC12497445 41054600
  3. [68]Schmidt R Carson PJ Jansen RJ Resurgence of syphilis in the United States: an assessment of contributing factors Infect. Dis. Res. Treat. 2019 12 1178633719883282 PMC6798162 31666795
  4. [72]Bolognia, J. L., Schaffer, J. V. & Cerroni, L. Dermatología (Elsevier, 2018).
  5. [73]Griffiths, C., Barker, J., Bleiker, T. O., Chalmers, R. & Creamer, D. Rook’s Textbook of Dermatology (Wiley, 2016).
  6. [74]Du Vivier, A. Atlas of Clinical Dermatology (Elsevier, 2002).
  7. [76]Nouri, K. et al. In Skin Cancer 61–81 (McGraw Hill Medical, 2008).
  8. [78]Knoop, K. J. et al. (eds) The Atlas of Emergency Medicine (McGraw Hill, 2010).
  9. [79]Usatine, R. P., Smith, M. A., Mayeaux, E. J. & Chumley, H. S. The Color Atlas of Family Medicine (McGraw Hill Education/Medical, 2013).
  10. [80]Buxton, P. K. & Morris-Jones, R. In ABC of Dermatology 24–35 (Wiley Blackwell, 2009).
  11. [81]Callen, J. P., Greer, K. E., Hood, A. F., Paller, A. S. & Swinyer, L. J. Color Atlas of Dermatology (Saunders, 1993).
  12. [82]Kane, K. S., Lio, P. A. & Stratigos, A. Color Atlas and Synopsis of Pediatric Dermatology (McGraw Hill Education/Medical, 2009).
  13. [85]Arnold, H. L., Odom, R. B., Andrews, G. C. & James, W. D. Andrews’ Diseases of the Skin: Clinical Dermatology (Saunders, 1990).
  14. [96]Daneshjou R He B Ouyang D Zou JY How to evaluate deep learning for cancer diagnostics—factors and recommendations Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2021 1875 188515 PMC8068597 33513392
  15. [103]Reeves, B. & Read, J. L. Total Engagement: How Games and Virtual Worlds are Changing the Way People Work and Businesses Compete (Harvard Business Press, 2009).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Groh, M., Badri, O., Daneshjou, R., Koochek, A., Harris, C., Soenksen, L. R., Doraiswamy, P. M., & Picard, R.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Banner Health (US)
  • MIT Media Lab (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Groh, Matthew
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2024-02
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
573-583
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W4391528827
Cited by
160
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 67 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 26
FWCI
14.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
dermatological diagnosis, skin tone, dark skin, algorithmic bias, teledermatology, differential diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, dermatologists, primary care physicians, underrepresented groups
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Algorithms, Diagnosis, Differential, Humans, Skin Diseases, Skin Pigmentation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review