ArticleMilitary medicine2025
A Framework for Advancing Burn Assessment With Artificial Intelligence.
Article in Military medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Current applications and prospects of artificial intelligence in burn diagnosis and treatment].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Review
- Interactive AI assisted pediatric burn assessment based on smartphone images.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionBurn injuries are a significant challenge in clinical and military settings, requiring accurate and timely assessment to guide treatment. Traditional methods for determining burn depth, a key factor in severity, rely heavily on subjective evaluation, leading to variability and delays in decision-making. Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) offer solutions to improve diagnostic accuracy and standardization. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of an AI model for burn depth assessment by comparing its outputs against a gold standard-focusing on image-based diagnosis of burn type and depth. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study analyzed 29 burn patients, under an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol (IRB# 12,689) at the Eskenazi Burn Center, Indianapolis. Digital images of burns were collected and classified into 3 burn depth categories: first-degree, second-degree, and third-degree. The AI model was fine-tuned on 131 annotated digital images, augmented to 1,200 using techniques such as rotation, flipping, and brightness adjustment. Style transfer using a machine learning models (called GAN) was used to further enhance the dataset by simulating burn variations. Zero-shot (meaning no previous training) segmentation, employing pretrained foundation models, was used to localize burn regions without task-specific training.
resultsThe proposed AI prediction model achieved 79% accuracy in classifying 3 burn depth categories. Data augmentation improved performance, while segmentation demonstrated strong utility, particularly in identifying burn regions effectively in diverse scenarios. Style transfer augmented the dataset by simulating realistic burn appearances, further enhancing model robustness. Zero-shot segmentation, meaning it identified burn areas without any prior training on similar images, successfully localized burn regions, aligning with clinical expectations.
conclusionsThis study highlights the potential of AI in improving burn depth classification and segmentation. The results demonstrate that integrating AI-driven models into clinical care can enhance diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and scalability, offering transformative tools for clinical and military applications in burn care. These methods provide a foundation for automated and standardized burn assessment, improving outcomes across diverse settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.