1,721,255 research outputs found

    Artificial intelligence in dermatopathology: Updates, strengths, and challenges

    No full text
    Artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved to become a significant force in various domains, including medicine. We explore the role of AI in pathology, with a specific focus on dermatopathology and neoplastic dermatopathology. AI, encompassing machine learning and deep learning, has demonstrated its potential in tasks ranging from diagnostic applications on whole slide imaging to predictive and prognostic functions in skin pathology. In dermatopathology, studies have assessed AI's ability to identify skin lesions, classify melanomas, and improve diagnostic accuracy. Results indicate that AI, particularly convolutional neural networks, can outperform human pathologists in terms of sensitivity and specificity. AI aids in predicting disease outcomes, identifying aggressive tumors, and differentiating between various skin conditions. Neoplastic dermatopathology showcases AI's prowess in classifying melanocytic lesions, discriminating between melanomas and nevi, and aids dermatopathologists in making accurate diagnoses. Studies emphasize the reproducibility and diagnostic aid that AI provides, especially in challenging cases. In inflammatory and lymphoproliferative dermatopathology, limited research exists, but studies show attempts to use AI to differentiate conditions such as mycosis fungoides and eczema. Although some results are promising, further exploration is needed in these areas. We highlight the extraordinary interest AI has garnered in the scientific community and its potential to assist clinicians and pathologists. Despite the advancements, we have stressed the importance of collaboration between medical professionals, computer scientists, bioinformaticians, and engineers to harness AI's benefits and acknowledging its limitations and risks. The integration of AI into dermatopathology holds great promise, positioning it as a valuable tool rather than as a replacement for human expertise

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore