Image enhancements by CLAHE and gamma correction do not improve diagnostic accuracy in teledermoscopy: a retrospective cohort study

Teledermoscopy (TDS) offers an efficient alternative to face-to-face assessment of suspicious skin lesions. Although diagnostic accuracy in TDS is relatively high, further improvement is desirable to reduce the risk of overlooked skin cancers and unnecessary interventions of benign lesions. Image enhancement (IE), i.e. digital modification of different parameters of an image, may potentially improve visualisation and thereby diagnostic accuracy. Several tools for IE were reviewed through two workshops and two were eventually selected for the study: Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalisation (CLAHE) for contrast enhancement and Gamma Correction for brightness adjustment. A retrospective randomized clinical study was performed in which 1997 TDS cases were distributed to 13 assessors with varying dermoscopic experience, who assessed lesions either with access to IE-tools (IE-group) or without (control group). Diagnostic accuracy for malignant vs. benign and melanoma-group vs. non-melanoma-group lesions was compared using chi-square tests. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) with assessor as a random intercept and adjustment for image quality was applied to account for assessor-dependent variance. Management recommendations were analyzed using both graded intervention levels relative to a gold standard and a stricter harm–benefit framework, assessing inappropriately under-management of malignant and over-management of benign lesions. No significant differences were found between the groups regarding malignant/benign classification. For melanoma differentiation, specificity was slightly, but significantly lower in the IE group compared to the control group (86.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 83.8–88.5 vs. 89.9%; 95% CI 87.6–91.8, respectively, p = 0.02) while sensitivity remained unchanged. GLMM analyses confirmed these findings. No significant differences were observed in appropriateness of management recommendations or diagnostic confidence. Use of the IE tools CLAHE and Gamma Correction did not improve diagnostic performance in TDS assessments. These findings do not support routine clinical use of these IE tools for the purpose of improving diagnostic assessment of skin lesions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Archives of Dermatological Research
Published
2026-01-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-025-04482-7
Primary Topic
Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Image enhancements by CLAHE and gamma correction do not improve diagnostic accuracy in teledermoscopy: a retrospective cohort study

Bertil Persson, Karina Schultz, J. Lapins, Teo Helkkula et al.
Archives of Dermatological Research
Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
article

Image enhancements by CLAHE and gamma correction do not improve diagnostic accuracy in teledermoscopy: a retrospective cohort study

Bertil Persson, Karina Schultz, J. Lapins, Teo Helkkula, Johan Kappelin, Hans Kristensson, Kári Rubek Nielsen, Åsa Ingvar, Carolina Nätterdahl, Lina U. Ivert, Fredrik Johansson, Niki Rados, Johan Palmgren, Karim Saleh
article en

Abstract

Teledermoscopy (TDS) offers an efficient alternative to face-to-face assessment of suspicious skin lesions. Although diagnostic accuracy in TDS is relatively high, further improvement is desirable to reduce the risk of overlooked skin cancers and unnecessary interventions of benign lesions. Image enhancement (IE), i.e. digital modification of different parameters of an image, may potentially improve visualisation and thereby diagnostic accuracy. Several tools for IE were reviewed through two workshops and two were eventually selected for the study: Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalisation (CLAHE) for contrast enhancement and Gamma Correction for brightness adjustment. A retrospective randomized clinical study was performed in which 1997 TDS cases were distributed to 13 assessors with varying dermoscopic experience, who assessed lesions either with access to IE-tools (IE-group) or without (control group). Diagnostic accuracy for malignant vs. benign and melanoma-group vs. non-melanoma-group lesions was compared using chi-square tests. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) with assessor as a random intercept and adjustment for image quality was applied to account for assessor-dependent variance. Management recommendations were analyzed using both graded intervention levels relative to a gold standard and a stricter harm–benefit framework, assessing inappropriately under-management of malignant and over-management of benign lesions. No significant differences were found between the groups regarding malignant/benign classification. For melanoma differentiation, specificity was slightly, but significantly lower in the IE group compared to the control group (86.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 83.8–88.5 vs. 89.9%; 95% CI 87.6–91.8, respectively, p = 0.02) while sensitivity remained unchanged. GLMM analyses confirmed these findings. No significant differences were observed in appropriateness of management recommendations or diagnostic confidence. Use of the IE tools CLAHE and Gamma Correction did not improve diagnostic performance in TDS assessments. These findings do not support routine clinical use of these IE tools for the purpose of improving diagnostic assessment of skin lesions.

Archives of Dermatological ResearchVol. 318(1)
Karolinska University Hospital (SE), Lund University (SE), Karolinska Institutet (SE), Helsingborgs lasarett (SE), Skåne University Hospital (SE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 87%
Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
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.