Cited by 51Nail Diseases and TreatmentsAI in cancer detectionArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

A Deep Learning Approach for Histopathological Diagnosis of Onychomycosis: Not Inferior to Analogue Diagnosis by Histopathologists

Open access
Decroos, F, Springenberg, S, Lang, T, Päpper, M, Zapf, A, Metze, D, Steinkraus, V, Böer-Auer, A·2021·Acta Dermato Venereologica

Abstract

Onychomycosis is common. Diagnosis can be confirmed by various methods; a commonly used method is the histological examination of nail clippings. A deep learning system was developed and its diagnostic accuracy compared with that of human experts. A dataset with annotations for fungal elements was used to train an artificial intelligence (AI) model. In a second dataset (n=199) the diagnostic accuracy of the AI was compared with that of dermatopathologists. The results show a non-inferiority of the deep learning system to that of analogue diagnosis (non-inferiority margin 5%) with respect to specificity and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). The AI achieved an AUC of 0.981. One limitation of this system is the need for a large number of training images. The AI had difficulty recognizing spores and confused serum or aggregated bacteria with fungal elements. Use of this deep learning system in dermatopathology routine might help to diagnose onychomycosis more efficiently.

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 · 10.2340/00015555-3893

Cites

32 of 32 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?

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: 2

  1. [29]Brunner EZA. Nonparametric ROC analyses for diagnostic trials. Newark, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2014: p. 471– 483.
  2. [31]Siemens W. Covariate adjusted nonparametric estimation of sensitivity and specificity in clustered data. Master thesis Heidelberg University, Institut für Medizinische Biometrie; 2017.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Decroos, F., Springenberg, S., Lang, T., Päpper, M., Zapf, A., Metze, D., Steinkraus, V, & Böer-Auer, A.
Affiliations
  • Dermatologikum Hamburg (DE)
  • University of Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Decroos, F
Venue
Acta Dermato Venereologica
Published
2021
Volume
101
Issue
8
Pages
adv00532
ISSN
  • 0001-5555 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2057
OpenAlex
W3196142250
Cited by
51
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1
FWCI
4.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Acta Dermato Venereologica (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Nail Diseases and Treatments
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
onychomycosis, deep learning, histopathological diagnosis, nail clippings, dermatopathology, fungal elements, diagnostic accuracy, non-inferiority
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, ROC Curve, Onychomycosis

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