Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40783534›Full record

Observational studyBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

Developing an AI-powered wound assessment tool: a methodological approach to data collection and model optimization.

Alessio Stefanelli, Sofia Zahia, Guillaume Chanel, Rania Niri, Swann Pichon, Sebastian Probst

Abstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Alessio StefanelliGeneva School of Health Sciences, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Western Switzerland, Avenue Champel 47, Geneva, CH-1206, Switzerland.
Sofia ZahiaImito AG, Flüelastrasse 31, Zurich, 8047, Switzerland.
Guillaume ChanelComputer Science Department, Faculty of Sciences, University of Geneva, Route de Drize 7, Battelle Bat. A, Carouge, Geneva, 1227, Switzerland.
Rania NiriComputer Science Department, Faculty of Sciences, University of Geneva, Route de Drize 7, Battelle Bat. A, Carouge, Geneva, 1227, Switzerland.
Swann PichonGeneva School of Health Sciences, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Western Switzerland, Avenue Champel 47, Geneva, CH-1206, Switzerland.
Sebastian ProbstGeneva School of Health Sciences, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Western Switzerland, Avenue Champel 47, Geneva, CH-1206, Switzerland. sebastian.probst@hesge.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic wounds (CWs) represent a significant and growing challenge in healthcare due to their prolonged healing times, complex management, and associated costs. Inadequate wound assessment by healthcare professionals (HCPs), often due to limited training and high clinical workload, contributes to suboptimal treatment and increased risk of complications. This study aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered wound assessment tool, integrated into a mobile application, to support HCPs in diagnosis, monitoring, and clinical decision-making.

methodsA multicenter observational study was conducted across three healthcare institutions in Western Switzerland. Researchers compiled a hybrid dataset of approximately 4,000 wound images through both retrospective extraction from clinical records and prospective collection using a standardized mobile application. The prospective data included high-resolution images, short videos, and 3D scans, along with structured clinical metadata. Retrospective data were anonymized and manually annotated by wound care experts. All images were labeled for wound segmentation and tissue classification to train and validate deep learning models.

resultsThe resulting dataset represented a broad spectrum of wound types (acute and chronic), anatomical locations, skin tones, and healing stages. The AI-based wound segmentation model, developed using the Deeplabv3 + architecture with a ResNet50 backbone, achieved a DICE score of 92% and an Intersection-over-Union (IOU) score of 85%. Tissue classification yielded a preliminary mean DICE score of 78%, although accuracy varied across tissue types, especially fibrin and necrosis. The models were optimized for mobile implementation through quantization, achieving real-time inference with an average processing time of 0.3 seconds and only a 0.3% performance reduction. The dual approach to data collection, prospective and retrospective-ensured both image standardization and real-world variability, enhancing the model's generalizability.

conclusionsThis study laid the foundation for an AI-driven digital tool to assist clinical wound assessment and education. The integration of robust datasets and AI models demonstrated the potential to improve diagnostic precision, support personalized care, and reduce wound-related healthcare costs. Although challenges remained, particularly in tissue classification, this work highlighted the promise of AI in transforming wound care and advancing clinical training.

trial registrationNot applicable.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDeep LearningMobile ApplicationsWounds and InjuriesChronic DiseaseData CollectionHumansRetrospective StudiesMedical imagingTissue segmentationWound assessmentWound monitoringWound segmentation

Identifiers

PMID40783534
PMCPMC12335118

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.