Lasse Cirkel, Fabian Lechner, Lukas Alexander Henk, Martin Krusche, Martin C Hirsch, Michael Hertl, Sebastian Kuhn, Johannes Knitza
{"title":"Large language models for dermatological image interpretation - a comparative study.","authors":"Lasse Cirkel, Fabian Lechner, Lukas Alexander Henk, Martin Krusche, Martin C Hirsch, Michael Hertl, Sebastian Kuhn, Johannes Knitza","doi":"10.1515/dx-2025-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Interpreting skin findings can be challenging for both laypersons and clinicians. Large language models (LLMs) offer accessible decision support, yet their diagnostic capabilities for dermatological images remain underexplored. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of LLMs based on image interpretation of common dermatological diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 500 dermatological images, encompassing four prevalent skin conditions (psoriasis, vitiligo, erysipelas and rosacea), were used to compare seven multimodal LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4o mini, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 1.5 Flash, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Llama3.2 90B and 11B). A standardized prompt was used to generate one top diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The highest overall accuracy was achieved by GPT-4o (67.8 %), followed by GPT-4o mini (63.8 %) and Llama3.2 11B (61.4 %). Accuracy varied considerably across conditions, with psoriasis with the highest mean LLM accuracy of 59.2 % and erysipelas demonstrating the lowest accuracy (33.4 %). 11.0 % of all images were misdiagnosed by all LLMs, whereas 11.6 % were correctly diagnosed by all models. Correct diagnoses by all LLMs were linked to clear, disease-specific features, such as sharply demarcated erythematous plaques in psoriasis. Llama3.2 90B was the only LLM to decline diagnosing images, particularly those involving intimate areas of the body.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LLM performance varied significantly, emphasizing the need for cautious usage. Notably, a free, locally hostable model correctly identified the top diagnosis for approximately two-thirds of all images, demonstrating the potential for safer, locally deployed LLMs. Advancements in model accuracy and the integration of clinical metadata could further enhance accessible and reliable clinical decision support systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":11273,"journal":{"name":"Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2025-0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Interpreting skin findings can be challenging for both laypersons and clinicians. Large language models (LLMs) offer accessible decision support, yet their diagnostic capabilities for dermatological images remain underexplored. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of LLMs based on image interpretation of common dermatological diseases.
Methods: A total of 500 dermatological images, encompassing four prevalent skin conditions (psoriasis, vitiligo, erysipelas and rosacea), were used to compare seven multimodal LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4o mini, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 1.5 Flash, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Llama3.2 90B and 11B). A standardized prompt was used to generate one top diagnosis.
Results: The highest overall accuracy was achieved by GPT-4o (67.8 %), followed by GPT-4o mini (63.8 %) and Llama3.2 11B (61.4 %). Accuracy varied considerably across conditions, with psoriasis with the highest mean LLM accuracy of 59.2 % and erysipelas demonstrating the lowest accuracy (33.4 %). 11.0 % of all images were misdiagnosed by all LLMs, whereas 11.6 % were correctly diagnosed by all models. Correct diagnoses by all LLMs were linked to clear, disease-specific features, such as sharply demarcated erythematous plaques in psoriasis. Llama3.2 90B was the only LLM to decline diagnosing images, particularly those involving intimate areas of the body.
Conclusions: LLM performance varied significantly, emphasizing the need for cautious usage. Notably, a free, locally hostable model correctly identified the top diagnosis for approximately two-thirds of all images, demonstrating the potential for safer, locally deployed LLMs. Advancements in model accuracy and the integration of clinical metadata could further enhance accessible and reliable clinical decision support systems.
期刊介绍:
Diagnosis focuses on how diagnosis can be advanced, how it is taught, and how and why it can fail, leading to diagnostic errors. The journal welcomes both fundamental and applied works, improvement initiatives, opinions, and debates to encourage new thinking on improving this critical aspect of healthcare quality. Topics: -Factors that promote diagnostic quality and safety -Clinical reasoning -Diagnostic errors in medicine -The factors that contribute to diagnostic error: human factors, cognitive issues, and system-related breakdowns -Improving the value of diagnosis – eliminating waste and unnecessary testing -How culture and removing blame promote awareness of diagnostic errors -Training and education related to clinical reasoning and diagnostic skills -Advances in laboratory testing and imaging that improve diagnostic capability -Local, national and international initiatives to reduce diagnostic error