Cited by 29Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

The Use of Artificial Intelligence for Skin Disease Diagnosis in Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Review

Open access
Escalé-Besa, Anna, Vidal-Alaball, Josep, Miró Catalina, Queralt, Gracia, Victor Hugo Garcia, Marin-Gomez, Francesc X., Fuster-Casanovas, Aïna·2024·Healthcare

Abstract

The prevalence of dermatological conditions in primary care, coupled with challenges such as dermatologist shortages and rising consultation costs, highlights the need for innovative solutions. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise for improving the diagnostic analysis of skin lesion images, potentially enhancing patient care in primary settings. This systematic review following PRISMA guidelines examined primary studies (2012–2022) assessing AI algorithms’ diagnostic accuracy for skin diseases in primary care. Studies were screened for eligibility based on their availability in the English language and exclusion criteria, with risk of bias evaluated using QUADAS-2. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. Fifteen studies (2019–2022), primarily from Europe and the USA, focusing on diagnostic accuracy were included. Sensitivity ranged from 58% to 96.1%, with accuracies varying from 0.41 to 0.93. AI applications encompassed triage and diagnostic support across diverse skin conditions in primary care settings, involving both patients and primary care professionals. While AI demonstrates potential for enhancing the accuracy of skin disease diagnostics in primary care, further research is imperative to address study heterogeneity and ensure algorithm reliability across diverse populations. Future investigations should prioritise robust dataset development and consider representative patient samples. Overall, AI may improve dermatological diagnosis in primary care, but careful consideration of algorithm limitations and implementation strategies is required.

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 · 10.3390/healthcare12121192

Cites

53 of 53 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?

  • CNN and Deep Neural Networks are good alternatives for skin disease diagnosis in primary care settings.

    “CNN and Deep Neural Networks are good alternatives for skin disease diagnosis in primary care settings [41].”

    From Artificial Intelligence in the Histopathological Assessment of Non-Neoplastic Skin Disorders: A Narrative Review with Future Perspectives (2025) · cites this paper as [41]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says the reviewed algorithms used CNNs and DNNs and that AI improved primary-care professionals’ diagnostic accuracy. But the Conclusions (page unavailable) describe AI as having potential to improve diagnosis, subject to further research and careful implementation; they do not establish these models as good alternatives to existing diagnosis. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Overcoming these challenges requires interdisciplinary collaboration, developing a concrete plan by policymakers and administrators, dedicated healthcare professional education, and ongoing research and development to support effective AI integration into PHC.

    “Overcoming these challenges requires interdisciplinary collaboration, developing a concrete plan by policymakers and administrators, dedicated healthcare professional education, and ongoing research and development to support effective AI integration into PHC [30, 37, 39–42].”

    From Opportunities, challenges, and requirements for Artificial Intelligence (AI) implementation in Primary Health Care (PHC): a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Conclusions (page not specified) call for further research and careful consideration of implementation strategies for AI-assisted skin-disease diagnosis in primary care. They do not call for interdisciplinary collaboration, a concrete plan by policymakers and administrators, or dedicated healthcare-professional education. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 1

  1. [36]Covidence—Literature Review Management Available online: https://get.covidence.org/literature-review?campaignid=18238395256&adgroupid=138114520982&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7Yrg5PWd_wIVQs7VCh247gJrEAAYASAAEgIt4fD_BwE (accessed on 30 May 2023)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Escalé-Besa, A., Vidal-Alaball, J., Miró Catalina, Q., Gracia, V. H. G., Marin-Gomez, F. X., & Fuster-Casanovas, A.
Affiliations
  • Universitat de Vic - Universitat Central de Catalunya (ES)
  • Health Promotion in Rural Areas Research Group, Gerència d’Atenció Primària i a la Comunitat de la Catalunya Central, Institut Català de la Salut, 08242 Manresa, Spain
  • Institut Català de la Salut (ES)
  • Unitat de Suport a la Recerca de la Catalunya Central, Fundació Institut Universitari per a la Recerca a l’Atenció Primària de Salut Jordi Gol i Gurina, 082424 Manresa, Spain
Venue
Healthcare
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-06-13
Volume
12
Issue
12
Pages
1192
ISSN
2227-9032 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399608418
Cited by
29
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Healthcare (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine
  • Fundació Institut de Recerca i Innovació en Ciències de la Vida i de la Salut a la Catalunya Central
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
artificial intelligence, dermatological diagnosis, primary care, skin imaging, diagnostic accuracy, triage, diagnostic support, dermatologist shortage, algorithm reliability, skin lesion images

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