Ayush Jain
Ayush is a senior software engineer in Google for Health and focuses on building AI assistance tools that improve the access to and accuracy of dermatologic care. He has published articles in a variety of areas spanning signals, algorithms, machine learning and healthcare. He holds a MS in Computer Science from University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and a B.Tech in Electrical Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.
Authored Publications
Sort By
Closing the AI generalisation gap by adjusting for dermatology condition distribution differences across clinical settings
Rajeev Rikhye
Aaron Loh
Grace Hong
Margaret Ann Smith
Vijaytha Muralidharan
Doris Wong
Michelle Phung
Nicolas Betancourt
Bradley Fong
Rachna Sahasrabudhe
Khoban Nasim
Alec Eschholz
Basil Mustafa
Jan Freyberg
Terry Spitz
Kat Chou
Peggy Bui
Justin Ko
Steven Lin
The Lancet eBioMedicine (2025)
Preview abstract
Background: Generalisation of artificial intelligence (AI) models to a new setting is challenging. In this study, we seek to understand the robustness of a dermatology (AI) model and whether it generalises from telemedicine cases to a new setting including both patient-submitted photographs (“PAT”) and clinician-taken photographs in-clinic (“CLIN”).
Methods: A retrospective cohort study involving 2500 cases previously unseen by the AI model, including both PAT and CLIN cases, from 22 clinics in the San Francisco Bay Area, spanning November 2015 to January 2021. The primary outcome measure for the AI model and dermatologists was the top-3 accuracy, defined as whether their top 3 differential diagnoses contained the top reference diagnosis from a panel of dermatologists per case.
Findings: The AI performed similarly between PAT and CLIN images (74% top-3 accuracy in CLIN vs. 71% in PAT), however, dermatologists were more accurate in PAT images (79% in CLIN vs. 87% in PAT). We demonstrate that demographic factors were not associated with AI or dermatologist errors; instead several categories of conditions were associated with AI model errors (p < 0.05). Resampling CLIN and PAT to match skin condition distributions to the AI development dataset reduced the observed differences (AI: 84% CLIN vs. 79% PAT; dermatologists: 77% CLIN vs. 89% PAT). We demonstrate a series of steps to close the generalisation gap, requiring progressively more information about the new dataset, ranging from the condition distribution to additional training data for rarer conditions. When using additional training data and testing on the dataset without resampling to match AI development, we observed comparable performance from end-to-end AI model fine tuning (85% in CLIN vs. 83% in PAT) vs. fine tuning solely the classification layer on top of a frozen embedding model (86% in CLIN vs. 84% in PAT).
Interpretation: AI algorithms can be efficiently adapted to new settings without additional training data by recalibrating the existing model, or with targeted data acquisition for rarer conditions and retraining just the final layer.
View details
Race- and Ethnicity-Stratified Analysis of an Artificial Intelligence–Based Tool for Skin Condition Diagnosis by Primary Care Physicians and Nurse Practitioners
David Way
Vishakha Gupta
Yi Gao
Guilherme De Oliveira Marinho
Jay David Hartford
Kimberly Kanada
Kunal Nagpal
Karen DeSalvo
Lily Hao Yi Peng
Carter Dunn
Susan Jen Huang
Peggy Bui
(2022)
Preview abstract
Background:
Many dermatologic cases are first evaluated by primary care physicians or nurse practitioners.
Objective:
This study aimed to evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool that assists with interpreting dermatologic conditions.
Methods:
We developed an AI-based tool and conducted a randomized multi-reader, multi-case study (20 primary care physicians, 20 nurse practitioners, and 1047 retrospective teledermatology cases) to evaluate its utility. Cases were enriched and comprised 120 skin conditions. Readers were recruited to optimize for geographical diversity; the primary care physicians practiced across 12 states (2-32 years of experience, mean 11.3 years), and the nurse practitioners practiced across 9 states (2-34 years of experience, mean 13.1 years). To avoid memory effects from incomplete washout, each case was read once by each clinician either with or without AI assistance, with the assignment randomized. The primary analyses evaluated the top-1 agreement, defined as the agreement rate of the clinicians’ primary diagnosis with the reference diagnoses provided by a panel of dermatologists (per case: 3 dermatologists from a pool of 12, practicing across 8 states, with 5-13 years of experience, mean 7.2 years of experience). We additionally conducted subgroup analyses stratified by cases’ self-reported race and ethnicity and measured the performance spread: the maximum performance subtracted by the minimum across subgroups.
Results:
The AI’s standalone top-1 agreement was 63%, and AI assistance was significantly associated with higher agreement with reference diagnoses. For primary care physicians, the increase in diagnostic agreement was 10% (P<.001), from 48% to 58%; for nurse practitioners, the increase was 12% (P<.001), from 46% to 58%. When stratified by cases’ self-reported race or ethnicity, the AI’s performance was 59%-62% for Asian, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, other, and Hispanic or Latinx individuals and 67% for both Black or African American and White subgroups. For the clinicians, AI assistance–associated improvements across subgroups were in the range of 8%-12% for primary care physicians and 8%-15% for nurse practitioners. The performance spread across subgroups was 5.3% unassisted vs 6.6% assisted for primary care physicians and 5.2% unassisted vs 6.0% assisted for nurse practitioners. In both unassisted and AI-assisted modalities, and for both primary care physicians and nurse practitioners, the subgroup with the highest performance on average was Black or African American individuals, though the differences with other subgroups were small and had overlapping 95% CIs.
Conclusions:
AI assistance was associated with significantly improved diagnostic agreement with dermatologists. Across race and ethnicity subgroups, for both primary care physicians and nurse practitioners, the effect of AI assistance remained high at 8%-15%, and the performance spread was similar at 5%-7%.
View details
Development and Assessment of an Artificial Intelligence–Based Tool for Skin Condition Diagnosis by Primary Care Physicians and Nurse Practitioners in Teledermatology Practices
David Way
Vishakha Gupta
Yi Gao
Guilherme De Oliveira Marinho
Jay David Hartford
Kimberly Kanada
Kunal Nagpal
Karen DeSalvo
Lily Hao Yi Peng
Carter Dunn
Susan Jen Huang
Peggy Bui
JAMA Network Open (2021)
Preview abstract
Importance: Most dermatologic cases are initially evaluated by nondermatologists such as primary care physicians (PCPs) or nurse practitioners (NPs).
Objective: To evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI)–based tool that assists with diagnoses of dermatologic conditions.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This multiple-reader, multiple-case diagnostic study developed an AI-based tool and evaluated its utility. Primary care physicians and NPs retrospectively reviewed an enriched set of cases representing 120 different skin conditions. Randomization was used to ensure each clinician reviewed each case either with or without AI assistance; each clinician alternated between batches of 50 cases in each modality. The reviews occurred from February 21 to April 28, 2020. Data were analyzed from May 26, 2020, to January 27, 2021.
Exposures: An AI-based assistive tool for interpreting clinical images and associated medical history.
Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary analysis evaluated agreement with reference diagnoses provided by a panel of 3 dermatologists for PCPs and NPs. Secondary analyses included diagnostic accuracy for biopsy-confirmed cases, biopsy and referral rates, review time, and diagnostic confidence.
Results: Forty board-certified clinicians, including 20 PCPs (14 women [70.0%]; mean experience, 11.3 [range, 2-32] years) and 20 NPs (18 women [90.0%]; mean experience, 13.1 [range, 2-34] years) reviewed 1048 retrospective cases (672 female [64.2%]; median age, 43 [interquartile range, 30-56] years; 41 920 total reviews) from a teledermatology practice serving 11 sites and provided 0 to 5 differential diagnoses per case (mean [SD], 1.6 [0.7]). The PCPs were located across 12 states, and the NPs practiced in primary care without physician supervision across 9 states. The NPs had a mean of 13.1 (range, 2-34) years of experience and practiced in primary care without physician supervision across 9 states. Artificial intelligence assistance was significantly associated with higher agreement with reference diagnoses. For PCPs, the increase in diagnostic agreement was 10% (95% CI, 8%-11%; P < .001), from 48% to 58%; for NPs, the increase was 12% (95% CI, 10%-14%; P < .001), from 46% to 58%. In secondary analyses, agreement with biopsy-obtained diagnosis categories of maglignant, precancerous, or benign increased by 3% (95% CI, −1% to 7%) for PCPs and by 8% (95% CI, 3%-13%) for NPs. Rates of desire for biopsies decreased by 1% (95% CI, 0-3%) for PCPs and 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%) for NPs; the rate of desire for referrals decreased by 3% (95% CI, 1%-4%) for PCPs and NPs. Diagnostic agreement on cases not indicated for a dermatologist referral increased by 10% (95% CI, 8%-12%) for PCPs and 12% (95% CI, 10%-14%) for NPs, and median review time increased slightly by 5 (95% CI, 0-8) seconds for PCPs and 7 (95% CI, 5-10) seconds for NPs per case.
Conclusions and Relevance: Artificial intelligence assistance was associated with improved diagnoses by PCPs and NPs for 1 in every 8 to 10 cases, indicating potential for improving the quality of dermatologic care.
View details
A deep learning system for differential diagnosis of skin diseases
David Way
Kang Lee
Peggy Bui
Kimberly Kanada
Guilherme de Oliveira Marinho
Jess Gallegos
Sara Gabriele
Vishakha Gupta
Nalini Singh
Lily Peng
Dennis Ai
Susan Huang
Carter Dunn
Nature Medicine (2020)
Preview abstract
Skin conditions affect 1.9 billion people. Because of a shortage of dermatologists, most cases are seen instead by general practitioners with lower diagnostic accuracy. We present a deep learning system (DLS) to provide a differential diagnosis of skin conditions using 16,114 de-identified cases (photographs and clinical data) from a teledermatology practice serving 17 sites. The DLS distinguishes between 26 common skin conditions, representing 80% of cases seen in primary care, while also providing a secondary prediction covering 419 skin conditions. On 963 validation cases, where a rotating panel of three board-certified dermatologists defined the reference standard, the DLS was non-inferior to six other dermatologists and superior to six primary care physicians (PCPs) and six nurse practitioners (NPs) (top-1 accuracy: 0.66 DLS, 0.63 dermatologists, 0.44 PCPs and 0.40 NPs). These results highlight the potential of the DLS to assist general practitioners in diagnosing skin conditions.
View details
