ArticleOphthalmology science
Comparison of Machine Learning Models to a Novel Score in the Identification of Patients at Low Risk for Diabetic Retinopathy.
Article in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A dynamic light image enhancement algorithm using generative adversarial network for group activity recognition.Scientific reports · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To develop an easily applicable predictor of patients at low risk for diabetic retinopathy (DR). Design: An experimental study on the development and validation of machine learning models (MLMs) and a novel retinopathy risk score (RRS) to detect patients at low risk for DR. Subjects: All individuals aged ≥18 years of age who participated in the telemedicine retinal screening initiative through Temple University Health Systems from October 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020. The subjects must have documented evidence of their diabetes mellitus (DM) diagnosis as well as a documented glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) recorded in their chart within 6 months of the retinal screening photograph. Methods: The charts of 1930 subjects (1590 evaluable) undergoing telemedicine screening for DR were reviewed, and 30 demographic and clinical parameters were collected. Diabetic retinopathy is a dichotomous variable where low risk is defined as no or mild retinopathy using the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy severity score. Five MLMs were trained to predict patients at low risk for DR using 1050 subjects and further underwent 10-fold cross validation to maximize its performance indicated by the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Additionally, a novel RRS is defined as the product of HbA1c closest to screening and years with DM. Retinopathy risk score was also applied to generate a predictive model. Main Outcome Measures: The performance of the trained MLMs and the RRS model was compared using DeLong's test. The models were further validated using a separate unseen test set of 540 subjects. The performance of the validation models were compared using DeLong's test and chi-square tests. Results: Using the test set, the AUC for the RRS was not statistically different from 4 out of 5 MLM. The error rate for predicting low-risk patients using the RRS was significantly lower than the naive rate (0.097 vs. 0.19; Conclusions: This novel RRS is a potentially useful and easily deployable predictor of patients at low risk for DR. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.