ABSTRACT
Background Large language models (LLMs) are gaining recognition across various medical fields; however, their specific role in dermatology, particularly in melanoma care, is not well- defined. This systematic review evaluates the current applications, advantages, and challenges associated with the use of LLMs in melanoma care.
Methods We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and Scopus databases for studies published up to July 23, 2024, focusing on the application of LLMs in melanoma. Identified studies were categorized into three subgroups: patient education, diagnosis and clinical management. The review process adhered to PRISMA guidelines, and the risk of bias was assessed using the modified QUADAS-2 tool.
Results Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies compared various LLM models, while four focused on ChatGPT. Three studies specifically examined multi-modal LLMs. In the realm of patient education, ChatGPT demonstrated high accuracy, though it often surpassed the recommended readability levels for patient comprehension. In diagnosis applications, multi- modal LLMs like GPT-4V showed capabilities in distinguishing melanoma from benign lesions. However, the diagnostic accuracy varied considerably, influenced by factors such as the quality and diversity of training data, image resolution, and the models’ ability to integrate clinical context. Regarding management advice, one study found that ChatGPT provided more reliable management advice compared to other LLMs, yet all models lacked depth and specificity for individualized decision-making.
Conclusions LLMs, particularly multimodal models, show potential in improving melanoma care through patient education, diagnosis, and management advice. However, current LLM applications require further refinement and validation to confirm their clinical utility. Future studies should explore fine-tuning these models on large dermatological databases and incorporate expert knowledge.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
