MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105693560 · doi:10.2196/72916

Assessment of Quality and Utility of Patient-Taken Smartphone Photographs of Atopic Dermatitis: Clinical Survey Study

2025· article· en· W7105693560 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Dermatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Outpatient clinicData collectionQuality assessmentSurvey research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) has a relapsing and remitting nature, and scheduled clinic visits only provide a snapshot of the skin condition at the moment. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the quality of patient-taken smartphone photographs of AD skin lesions and characterize patients using smartphone photographs as a tool to assist the physician to show disease activity in between consultations. Methods: Patients from 2 university outpatient clinics specialized in AD were surveyed. A questionnaire regarding digital readiness was completed, and a previously taken skin lesion photograph on the patients' own smartphone was evaluated. Results: Between February 2024 and September 2024, a total of 100 questionnaires were completed, 60 (60%) by participants from the capital region of Denmark and 40 (40%) by participants from an urban area, including 62 (62%) men and 38 (38%) women. The mean age of the recruited patients was 33.9 (SD 19.9) years. A total of 78% (78/100) of the patients used a desktop computer, laptop, or tablet often or always, and 86% (86/100) corresponded with the health care system using technology (eg, via email to the general practitioner or contact with hospitals via apps). More than 50% (52/100, 52%) strongly agreed or agreed with the statement that they would prefer a remote online visit with, for example, upload of skin lesion photographs over a routine in-person office visit. Almost 3 out of 4 patients had a photograph of their AD skin lesion on their smartphone, most (38/71, 54%) with the sole intention of presenting it to a physician. The photographs were of good quality in 85% (60/71) of the cases, and most (61/71, 86%) of the smartphone photographs were assessed to be useful for diagnostic and clinical evaluation. Receiving topical monotherapy was significantly associated with increased risk of having taken a skin lesion smartphone photograph (P=.006). Conclusions: Patients with AD followed up on in an outpatient clinic often took good-quality photographs of their skin lesions before consultations with the intention of presenting them to the physician.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.380 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR DermatologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207