Comparison of Facial Feature Grading by an AI-Based System Versus Human Expert Grading on Images Under Standardized Clinical and At-Home Settings
- 1Haut.AI
Abstract
Digital photography remains the gold standard for dermatological assessment, but reliance on standardized stationary image-capture systems limits trial scalability, whereas smartphones combined with computer vision artificial intelligence (AI) could enable hybrid and decentralized clinical trials (DCTs). This study assessed the facial feature grading of an AI-based system against expert panel consensus across three settings with decreasing acquisition control: Standard Studio Imaging (SSI), Clinic Smartphone Imaging (CSI), and Home Smartphone Imaging (HSI). Expert inter-rater reliability was good to excellent (median ICC 0.84-0.90), and the system showed high operator-independent test-retest repeatability across independently captured images (median ICC 0.97-0.98). Agreement with experts was maintained across all settings for macro-geometric features (ptosis{rho} = 0.74-0.81, nasolabial fold{rho} = 0.68-0.79) and for discrete pigmentation and inflammatory lesions (pigmented spot density{rho} = 0.62-0.76), declined for fine-texture features under uncontrolled acquisition (forehead wrinkles{rho} = 0.76 to 0.48), and remained limited for color-dependent features irrespective of setting. These findings support the AI-based system as an objective grading tool for a defined subset of facial endpoints in hybrid and DCTs in dermatology.
Related
- F2D-RetinaNet: a feature-to-decision dual-path network with fractional operators for retinal disease detection and grading
- Staging and Grading Advanced Periodontitis with Large Language Models from Standardized Case Summaries: A Multicenter Concordance and Reproducibility Study
- AI-Based Grading of Facial Aging Signs and Prediction of Visible Age From Standardized Facial Images: Algorithm Development and Internal Evaluation Study.
- Drug Dosing in Chronic Kidney Disease: Comparison of Standardized eGFR and eGFR Adjusted for Body Surface Area
- Age-Standardized Comorbidity Prevalence of Cardiometabolic Conditions and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Hong Kong: A District Comparison
BibTeX
@misc{danko2026comparison,
title = {{Comparison of Facial Feature Grading by an AI-Based System Versus Human Expert Grading on Images Under Standardized Clinical and At-Home Settings}},
author = {D. Danko and T. Tlyachev and K. Kiselev and L. Bousseksou and E. Camel and G. Stamatas and A. Georgievskaya},
howpublished = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.30.26364271},
url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.30.26364271v1},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Comparison of Facial Feature Grading by an AI-Based System Versus Human Expert Grading on Images Under Standardized Clinical and At-Home Settings
AU - D. Danko
AU - T. Tlyachev
AU - K. Kiselev
AU - L. Bousseksou
AU - E. Camel
AU - G. Stamatas
AU - A. Georgievskaya
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/30
PB - medRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.09.30.26364271
UR - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.30.26364271v1
AB - Digital photography remains the gold standard for dermatological assessment, but reliance on standardized stationary image-capture systems limits trial scalability, whereas smartphones combined with computer vision artificial intelligence (AI) could enable hybrid and decentralized clinical trials (DCTs). This study assessed the facial feature grading of an AI-based system against expert panel consensus across three settings with decreasing acquisition control: Standard Studio Imaging (SSI), Clinic Smartphone Imaging (CSI), and Home Smartphone Imaging (HSI). Expert inter-rater reliability was good to excellent (median ICC 0.84-0.90), and the system showed high operator-independent test-retest repeatability across independently captured images (median ICC 0.97-0.98). Agreement with experts was maintained across all settings for macro-geometric features (ptosis{rho} = 0.74-0.81, nasolabial fold{rho} = 0.68-0.79) and for discrete pigmentation and inflammatory lesions (pigmented spot density{rho} = 0.62-0.76), declined for fine-texture features under uncontrolled acquisition (forehead wrinkles{rho} = 0.76 to 0.48), and remained limited for color-dependent features irrespective of setting. These findings support the AI-based system as an objective grading tool for a defined subset of facial endpoints in hybrid and DCTs in dermatology.
ER -