ArticleBMJ open2024
Is cardiovascular risk profiling from UK Biobank retinal images using explicit deep learning estimates of traditional risk factors equivalent to actual risk measurements? A prospective cohort study design.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-driven multimodal retinal imaging for early detection and risk stratification of vascular and neurodegenerative diseases.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Advancing Brain and Body Vascular Imaging in Bipolar Disorder: A Report From the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Vascular Task Force.Bipolar disorders · 2026Review
- Predicting the Degree of Coronary Artery Stenosis Through Retinal Vascular Characteristics and Minimal Clinical Information.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Machine Learning Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Using Radiomic Features from Multimodal Retinal Images.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDespite extensive exploration of potential biomarkers of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) derived from retinal images, it remains unclear how retinal images contribute to CVD risk profiling and how the results can inform lifestyle modifications. Therefore, we aimed to determine the performance of cardiovascular risk prediction model from retinal images via explicitly estimating 10 traditional CVD risk factors and compared with the model based on actual risk measurements.
designA prospective cohort study design.
settingThe UK Biobank (UKBB), a prospective cohort study, following the health conditions including CVD outcomes of adults recruited between 2006 and 2010.
participantsA subset of data from the UKBB which contains 52 297 entries with retinal images and 5-year cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was used. Our dataset is split into 3:1:1 as training set (n=31 403), validation set (n=10 420) and testing set (n=10 474). We developed a deep learning (DL) model to predict 5-year MACE using a two-stage DL neural network. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We computed accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared variations in the risk prediction models combining CVD risk factors and retinal images.
resultsThe first-stage DL model demonstrated that the 10 CVD risk factors can be estimated from a given retinal image with an accuracy ranging between 65.2% and 89.8% (overall AUC of 0.738 with 95% CI: 0.710 to 0.766). In MACE prediction, our model outperformed the traditional score-based models, with 8.2% higher AUC than Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), 3.5% for SCORE 2 and 7.1% for the Framingham Risk Score (with p value<0.05 for all three comparisons).
conclusionsOur algorithm estimates the 5-year risk of MACE based on retinal images, while explicitly presenting which risk factors should be checked and intervened. This two-stage approach provides human interpretable information between stages, which helps clinicians gain insights into the screening process copiloting with the DL model.
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.