ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Ocular biomarkers: useful incidental findings by deep learning algorithms in fundus photographs.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. 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.
- Pioneering Comprehensive Eye Care in Northern Pakistan: Development and Implementation of a Hub-and-Spoke Model.Cureus · 2026Article
- Transforming Fundus Photography for Deep Learning-Based Anemia Screening.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesArtificial intelligence can assist with ocular image analysis for screening and diagnosis, but it is not yet capable of autonomous full-spectrum screening. Hypothetically, false-positive results may have unrealized screening potential arising from signals persisting despite training and/or ambiguous signals such as from biomarker overlap or high comorbidity. The study aimed to explore the potential to detect clinically useful incidental ocular biomarkers by screening fundus photographs of hypertensive adults using diabetic deep learning algorithms. SUBJECTS/
methodsPatients referred for treatment-resistant hypertension were imaged at a hospital unit in Perth, Australia, between 2016 and 2022. The same 45° colour fundus photograph selected for each of the 433 participants imaged was processed by three deep learning algorithms. Two expert retinal specialists graded all false-positive results for diabetic retinopathy in non-diabetic participants.
resultsOf the 29 non-diabetic participants misclassified as positive for diabetic retinopathy, 28 (97%) had clinically useful retinal biomarkers. The models designed to screen for fewer diseases captured more incidental disease. All three algorithms showed a positive correlation between severity of hypertensive retinopathy and misclassified diabetic retinopathy.
conclusionsThe results suggest that diabetic deep learning models may be responsive to hypertensive and other clinically useful retinal biomarkers within an at-risk, hypertensive cohort. Observing that models trained for fewer diseases captured more incidental pathology increases confidence in signalling hypotheses aligned with using self-supervised learning to develop autonomous comprehensive screening. Meanwhile, non-referable and false-positive outputs of other deep learning screening models could be explored for immediate clinical use in other populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.