{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023351648351648352, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.147058823529412, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Inter‐ and intra‐observer agreement in dermatologists’ diagnoses of hyperpigmented facial lesions and development of an algorithm for automated diagnosis

Hyperpigmentation has varied aetio‐pathologies. Hence, accurate and reproducible diagnosis of the type of hyperpigmentation is essential for effective management. It is typically made clinically by dermatologists but the rate of inter‐ and intra‐observer agreement/variability is unknown. Hyperpigmented facial lesions are extremely common but access to dermatological services is difficult or costly in most countries. Thus, it is desired to evaluate dermatologists’ inter‐ and intra‐observer agreement in the diagnosis and to develop an algorithm for automated diagnosis.