Paper detail

DermaVQA-DAS: Dermatology Assessment Schema (DAS) & Datasets for Closed-Ended Question Answering & Segmentation in Patient-Generated Dermatology Images

Recent advances in dermatological image analysis have been driven by large-scale annotated datasets; however, most existing benchmarks focus on dermatoscopic images and lack patient-authored queries and clinical context, limiting their applicability to patient-centered care. To address this gap, we introduce DermaVQA-DAS, an extension of the DermaVQA dataset that supports two complementary tasks: closed-ended question answering (QA) and dermatological lesion segmentation. Central to this work is the Dermatology Assessment Schema (DAS), a novel expert-developed framework that systematically captures clinically meaningful dermatological features in a structured and standardized form. DAS comprises 36 high-level and 27 fine-grained assessment questions, with multiple-choice options in English and Chinese. Leveraging DAS, we provide expert-annotated datasets for both closed QA and segmentation and benchmark state-of-the-art multimodal models. For segmentation, we evaluate multiple prompting strategies and show that prompt design impacts performance: the default prompt achieves the best results under Mean-of-Max and Mean-of-Mean evaluation aggregation schemes, while an augmented prompt incorporating both patient query title and content yields the highest performance under majority-vote-based microscore evaluation, achieving a Jaccard index of 0.395 and a Dice score of 0.566 with BiomedParse. For closed-ended QA, overall performance is strong across models, with average accuracies ranging from 0.729 to 0.798; o3 achieves the best overall accuracy (0.798), closely followed by GPT-4.1 (0.796), while Gemini-1.5-Pro shows competitive performance within the Gemini family (0.783). We publicly release DermaVQA-DAS, the DAS schema, and evaluation protocols to support and accelerate future research in patient-centered dermatological vision-language modeling (https://osf.io/72rp3).

preprint2025arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.