 |
|
Accuracy of Computer Diagnosis of Melanoma
A Quantitative Meta-analysis
Barbara Rosado, MD;
Scott Menzies, MD;
Alexandra Harbauer, MD;
Hubert Pehamberger, MD;
Klaus Wolff, MD;
Michael Binder, MD;
Harald Kittler, MD
Arch Dermatol. 2003;139:361-367.
Background Recent developments in computer technology have raised expectations that fully automated diagnostic instruments will become available to diagnose cutaneous melanoma without the need of human expertise.
Objectives To critically review the contemporary literature on computer diagnosis of melanoma, evaluate the accuracy of such computer diagnosis, analyze the influence of study characteristics, and compare the accuracy of computer diagnosis of melanoma with human diagnosis.
Methods Quantitative meta-analysis of published reports.
Data Sources Eligible studies were identified by a MEDLINE search covering the period from January 1991 to March 2002, by manual searches of the reference lists of retrieved articles, and by direct communication with experts.
Results Thirty studies with substantial differences in methodological quality were deemed eligible for meta-analysis. Five of these complied with the predetermined list of "good quality" requirements, but none met all methodological quality requirements. Ten of these studies compared the performance of computer diagnosis with human diagnosis. The diagnostic accuracy achieved with computer diagnosis was statistically not different from that of human diagnosis (log odds ratios, 3.36 vs 3.51; P = .80). The diagnostic performance of the computer diagnosis was better for studies that used dermoscopic images than for studies that used clinical images (log odds ratios, 4.2 vs 3.4; P = .08). Other study characteristics did not significantly influence the accuracy of the computer diagnosis.
Conclusions The computer diagnosis of melanoma is accurate under experimental conditions, but the practical value of automated diagnostic instruments under real-world conditions is currently unknown. We suggest minimum requirements for methodological quality in future experimental studies or, ideally, randomized controlled trials.
From the Department of Dermatology, University of Vienna Medical School, Vienna, Austria (Drs Rosado, Harbauer, Pehamberger, Wolff, Binder, and Kittler), and the Melanoma and Skin Cancer Research Institute and Department of Surgery, University of Sydney, Sydney Melanoma Unit, Sydney Cancer Center, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia (Dr Menzies).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Accuracy of Computer Diagnosis of Melanoma—Editor's Comment
Rosamaria Corona
Arch Dermatol. 2003;139(3):366.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
The Performance of SolarScan: An Automated Dermoscopy Image Analysis Instrument for the Diagnosis of Primary Melanoma
Menzies et al.
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:1388-1396.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A note on meta-analysis of diagnostic test studies.
Casazza
Arch Dermatol 2004;140:363-364.
FULL TEXT
|
