Table 2.

Influence of included patient data on the classification performance of the single skin diseases or lesions^a.

Study, patient data, and metric		Skin disease
		MELb	NVc	BCCd	SCCe	AKf	AKIECg	BKLh	DFi	VASCj	MISCk	SKl
Gessert et al [46]: age, sex, location
	AUCm	+n	(+/−)o	−p	−	+	Xq	+	+	−	X	X
	Sensitivity	−	−	−	−	−	X	−	−	−	X	X
	Specificity	+	+	+	+	+	X	+	+	+	X	X
Sriwong et al [55]: age, sex, location
	Sensitivity	+	−	+	X	X	−	+	+	−	X	X
	Specificity	−	+	−	X	X	+	+	+/−	+	X	X
Li et al [52]: age, sex, location
	Sensitivity	−	−	+	X	X	−	+	+	+	X	X
Kawahara et al [50]: sex, location, elevation
	Sensitivity	+	+	+	X	X	X	X	X	X	+	+
	Specificity	+	+	+/−	X	X	X	X	X	X	+	+
Pacheco and Krohling [53]: age, location, itches, bleeds, pain, increased, changed, elevation
	Sensitivity	+	+	+	+	+	X	X	X	X	X	+
	Specificity	+	+	+	−	+	X	X	X	X	X	+

^aThe study of Yap et al [56] is excluded because the confusion matrix was not legible. It must be noticed that there are some combinations where the outcome deteriorates by including patient data.

^bMEL: melanoma.

^cNV: Melanocytic nevus.

^dBCC: basal cell carcinoma.

^eSCC: squamous cell carcinoma.

^fAK: Actinic keratosis.

^gAKIEC: actinic keratosis and intraepithelial carcinoma.

^hBKL: benign keratosis-like lesion.

ⁱDF: dermatofibroma.

^jVASC: vascular lesion.

^kMISC: miscellaneous and vascular lesion.

^lSK: seborrheic keratosis.

^mAUC: area under the curve.

ⁿIndicates improvement compared with classification performance without patient data.

^oIndicates no change compared with classification performance without patient data.

^pIndicates degradation compared with classification performance without patient data.

^qThis implies that the lesion type was not considered in the classification task of the study.