An observational study in Dermatitis, Melanoma (Skin Cancer) and Alopecia, sponsored by AI Labs Group S.L. Completed at 1 site in Spain. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-02-24.
Sponsored by AI Labs Group S.L · Observational
This study aims to determine if an artificial intelligence (AI) medical device can help doctors more accurately identify a wide variety of skin conditions and improve the efficiency of patient consultations. While many patients visit primary care for skin issues, general doctors may sometimes have different opinions from specialists, which can lead to delays in getting the right treatment.
The researchers hypothesized that using the AI tool would increase the true diagnostic accuracy of healthcare professionals for multiple skin conditions. To test this, 16 doctors (including 10 general practitioners and 6 dermatologists) evaluated 29 different medical images.
For each case, the doctors followed a structured process:
The primary question the study tried to answer was whether AI support could significantly improve correct diagnoses across 13 different types of skin pathologies-ranging from common rashes to skin cancer-while also making the consultation process faster and more effective for both doctors and patients.
This detailed description outlines the clinical methodology, technical framework, and data integrity protocols utilized in the investigation of the Legit Health Plus medical device for skin pathologies in primary care and dermatology.
Study Design and Technical Methodology The research was conducted as a prospective observational and cross-sectional self-controlled study. It utilized a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) framework to evaluate the impact of Computer-Aided Diagnosis (CAD) on clinician performance.
Quality Assurance and Data Management
To ensure the scientific integrity of the investigation, the following quality and monitoring protocols were implemented:
Ethical and Confidentiality Framework The study adhered to ISO 14155:2021, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
The study population consists of board-certified healthcare professionals recruited from the clinical fields of general medicine and dermatology. The participant group includes:
Participants were recruited to engage in a remote, web-based evaluation environment rather than being selected from a single physical hospital or town. The clinical images evaluated as part of the study "cases" were sourced from international public dermatology atlases and existing research databases from the sponsor, representing a diverse global patient population.
Exclusion Criteria:
This group is composed of board-certified healthcare professionals (HCPs) who serve as the "readers" in this multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) study. The cohort is uniquely characterized by its internal comparison: each participant acts as their own control. - Dual Professional Roles: The group includes 10 primary care physicians (PCPs) and 6 dermatologists, allowing for a comparison between generalist and specialist diagnostic baseline performance. - Interventional Exposure: All participants are evaluated under two distinct conditions: first, providing a diagnosis based solely on clinical images and patient history; second, providing a diagnosis assisted by the AI-based medical device's top 5 suggestions and confidence levels. - Clinical Expertise: Every member of the cohort has a minimum of 5 years of clinical experience in their respective field.
Device: AI-based medical device for aided diagnosis in Dermatology
The intervention consists of a Computer-Aided Diagnosis (CAD) software-only medical device that utilizes computer vision algorithms to analyze digital images of skin structures. During the study, healthcare professionals use the tool as a diagnostic support system to assist in the evaluation of complex dermatological conditions.
Diagnostic Accuracy for Multiple Dermatological Conditions with and without Artificial Intelligence Support
This measure evaluates the "Top-1" diagnostic accuracy of healthcare professionals (HCPs). Accuracy is determined by comparing the clinician's identified diagnosis-both before and after receiving the AI device's top 5 suggestions and confidence levels-against a confirmed reference standard (confirmed by dermatologists or anatomical pathology)
Time frame: Day 1
Change in Dermatology Referral Rate Assisted by Artificial Intelligence.
This outcome validates the percentage of cases that practitioners determine should be referred to a dermatology specialist after reviewing the AI-provided information, which includes malignancy indices and referral recommendations.
Time frame: Day 1
Percentage of Cases Deemed Manageable via Remote Consultation.
This measure assesses the practitioners' evaluation of whether a case can be confirmed and treated remotely through teledermatology based on the AI analysis.
Time frame: Day 1
Clinical Utility and Usability Scores for Diagnostic Support.
This outcome assesses the perceived value of the device using a Clinical Utility Questionnaire. It measures average utility of data (on a scale of 0-10, where 10 is most useful), system usability scores, and the impact on consultation time reduction.
Time frame: Day 1
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
AI Labs Group S.L