Artificial Intelligence in Cosmetic Dermatology with Regard to Laser Treatments: A Comparative Analysis of AI and Dermatologists’ Decision-Making

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) has developed into an increasingly important tool in dermatology. While new technologies integrated within laser devices are emerging, there is a lack of data on the applicability of publicly available AI models. Methods: The prospective study used an online questionnaire where participants evaluated diagnosis and treatment for 25 dermatological cases shown as pictures. The same questions were given to AI models: ChatGPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 2.5 Flash, and Grok-3. Results: Dermatologists outperformed AI in diagnostic accuracy (suspected primary diagnosis-SD 75.6%) in pooled dermatologists vs. pooled AI (SD 57.0%), with laser specialists achieving the highest accuracy (SD 82.0%) and residents the lowest (SD 66.0%). There was a high heterogeneity across AI models. Gemini approached dermatologist performance (SD 72.0%), while Claude showed a low accuracy (SD 40.0%). While AI models reached near 100% accuracy in some classic/common diagnoses (e.g., acne, rosacea, spider angioma, infantile hemangioma), their accuracy dropped to near 0% on rare or context-dependent cases (e.g., blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome, angiosarcoma, hirsutism, cutaneous siderosis). Inter-rater agreement was high among laser experts in terms of diagnostic accuracy and treatment choice. Agreement between residents and AI models was highest for diagnostic accuracy and treatment choice, while it was lowest between experts and AI models. Conclusions: Before AI-based tools can be integrated into daily practice, particularly regarding diagnosis and appropriate laser treatment recommendations, specific supervised medical training of the AI model is necessary, as open-source platforms currently lack the ability to contextualize presented data.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cosmetics
Published
2025-12-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics13010005
Primary Topic
Dermatologic Treatments and Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial Intelligence in Cosmetic Dermatology with Regard to Laser Treatments: A Comparative Analysis of AI and Dermatologists’ Decision-Making

Cindy Franklin, Sammy Francis Murday, Kristine Heidemeyer, Simone Cazzaniga et al.
Cosmetics
Dermatologic Treatments and Research
article

Artificial Intelligence in Cosmetic Dermatology with Regard to Laser Treatments: A Comparative Analysis of AI and Dermatologists’ Decision-Making

Cindy Franklin, Sammy Francis Murday, Kristine Heidemeyer, Simone Cazzaniga, Flurin L. Brand, Ashraf Badawi, S. Morteza Seyed Jafari, Alexandra Junge, Nikhil Yawalkar, Zora Martignoni, Simone Böll, Dominik Obrist, Ali Mokhtari, Basil Signer, Hans-Joachim Laubach, Roberta Vasconcelos-Berg, Antonia Reimer-Taschenbrecker, Laurence Feldmeyer, Charlotte Vogel, Mathias Lehmann
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) has developed into an increasingly important tool in dermatology. While new technologies integrated within laser devices are emerging, there is a lack of data on the applicability of publicly available AI models. Methods: The prospective study used an online questionnaire where participants evaluated diagnosis and treatment for 25 dermatological cases shown as pictures. The same questions were given to AI models: ChatGPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 2.5 Flash, and Grok-3. Results: Dermatologists outperformed AI in diagnostic accuracy (suspected primary diagnosis-SD 75.6%) in pooled dermatologists vs. pooled AI (SD 57.0%), with laser specialists achieving the highest accuracy (SD 82.0%) and residents the lowest (SD 66.0%). There was a high heterogeneity across AI models. Gemini approached dermatologist performance (SD 72.0%), while Claude showed a low accuracy (SD 40.0%). While AI models reached near 100% accuracy in some classic/common diagnoses (e.g., acne, rosacea, spider angioma, infantile hemangioma), their accuracy dropped to near 0% on rare or context-dependent cases (e.g., blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome, angiosarcoma, hirsutism, cutaneous siderosis). Inter-rater agreement was high among laser experts in terms of diagnostic accuracy and treatment choice. Agreement between residents and AI models was highest for diagnostic accuracy and treatment choice, while it was lowest between experts and AI models. Conclusions: Before AI-based tools can be integrated into daily practice, particularly regarding diagnosis and appropriate laser treatment recommendations, specific supervised medical training of the AI model is necessary, as open-source platforms currently lack the ability to contextualize presented data.

CosmeticsVol. 13(1)
University of Geneva (CH), University of Bern (CH), Cairo University (EG), University of Lucerne (CH), University of Szeged (HU), University Hospital of Bern (CH), University Hospital of Basel (CH), Hôpital Beau-Séjour (CH), University Hospital Cologne (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Dermatologic Treatments and Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.