Multiple studies have compared the performance of artificial intelligence (AI)-based models for automated skin cancer classification to human experts, thus setting the cornerstone for a successful translation of AI-based tools into clinicopathological practice. The objective of the study was to systematically analyse the current state of research on reader studies involving melanoma and to assess their potential clinical relevance by evaluating three main aspects: test set characteristics (holdout/out-of-distribution data set, composition), test setting (experimental/clinical, inclusion of metadata) and representativeness of participating clinicians. PubMed, Medline and ScienceDirect were screened for peer-reviewed studies published between 2017 and 2021 and dealing with AI-based skin cancer classification involving melanoma. The search terms skin cancer classification, deep learning, convolutional neural network (CNN), melanoma (detection), digital biomarkers, histopathology and whole slide imaging were combined. Based on the search results, only studies that considered direct comparison of AI results with clinicians and had a diagnostic classification as their main objective were included. A total of 19 reader studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 CNN-based approaches addressed the classification of dermoscopic images; 6 concentrated on the classification of clinical images, whereas 2 dermatopathological studies utilised digitised histopathological whole slide images. All 19 included studies demonstrated superior or at least equivalent performance of CNN-based classifiers compared with clinicians. However, almost all studies were conducted in highly artificial settings based exclusively on single images of the suspicious lesions. Moreover, test sets mainly consisted of holdout images and did not represent the full range of patient populations and melanoma subtypes encountered in clinical practice.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have been shown to help dermatologists diagnose melanoma more accurately, however they lack transparency, hindering user acceptance. Explainable AI (XAI) methods can help to increase transparency, yet often lack precise, domain-specific explanations. Moreover, the impact of XAI methods on dermatologists’ decisions has not yet been evaluated. Building upon previous research, we introduce an XAI system that provides precise and domain-specific explanations alongside its differential diagnoses of melanomas and nevi. Through a three-phase study, we assess its impact on dermatologists’ diagnostic accuracy, diagnostic confidence, and trust in the XAI-support. Our results show strong alignment between XAI and dermatologist explanations. We also show that dermatologists’ confidence in their diagnoses, and their trust in the support system significantly increase with XAI compared to conventional AI. This study highlights dermatologists’ willingness to adopt such XAI systems, promoting future use in the clinic.

Background: As the use of smartphones continues to surge globally, mobile applications (apps) have become a powerful tool for healthcare engagement. Prominent among these are dermatology apps powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI), which provide immediate diagnostic guidance and educational resources for skin diseases, including skin cancer.Objective: This article, authored by the EADV AI Task Force, seeks to offer insights and recommendations for the present and future deployment of AI‐assisted smartphone applications (apps) and web‐based services for skin diseases with emphasis on skin cancer detection.Methods: An initial position statement was drafted on a comprehensive literature review, which was subsequently refined through two rounds of digital discussions and meticulous feedback by the EADV AI Task Force, ensuring its accuracy, clarity and relevance.Results: Eight key considerations were identified, including risks associated with inaccuracy and improper user education, a decline in professional skills, the influence of non‐medical commercial interests, data security, direct and indirect costs, regulatory approval and the necessity of multidisciplinary implementation. Following these considerations, three main recommendations were formulated: (1) to ensure user trust, app developers should prioritize transparency in data quality, accuracy, intended use, privacy and costs; (2) Apps and web‐based services should ensure a uniform user experience for diverse groups of patients; (3) European authorities should adopt a rigorous and consistent regulatory framework for dermatology apps to ensure their safety and accuracy for users.Conclusions: The utilisation of AI‐assisted smartphone apps and web‐based services in diagnosing and treating skin diseases has the potential to greatly benefit patients in their dermatology journeys. By prioritising innovation, fostering collaboration and implementing effective regulations, we can ensure the successful integration of these apps into clinical practice.