Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39994433›Full record

ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025

Real-world feasibility, accuracy and acceptability of automated retinal photography and AI-based cardiovascular disease risk assessment in Australian primary care settings: a pragmatic trial.

Wenyi Hu, Zhihong Lin, Malcolm Clark, Jacqueline Henwood, Xianwen Shang, Ruiye Chen, Katerina Kiburg, Lei Zhang, Zongyuan Ge, Peter van Wijngaarden and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Interocular asymmetry of fundus characteristics in patients with unilateral severe carotid artery stenosis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Wenyi HuCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Zhihong LinThe AIM for Health Lab, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Malcolm ClarkDepartment of General Practice, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jacqueline HenwoodCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Xianwen ShangCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Ruiye ChenCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Katerina KiburgOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Lei ZhangClinical Medical Research Center, Children's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210008, China.
Zongyuan GeThe AIM for Health Lab, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. zongyuan.ge@monash.edu.
Peter van WijngaardenCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. peterv@unimelb.edu.au.
Zhuoting ZhuCentre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. lisa.zhu@unimelb.edu.au.
Mingguang HeOphthalmology, Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. mingguang.he@polyu.edu.hk.

Funding

Global STEM Professorship Scheme P0046113Medical Research Future Fund MRFAI00035Project of Investigation on Health Status of Employees in Financial Industry in Guangzhou, China Z012014075The NHMRC Investigator Grant APP1175405
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aim to assess the real-world accuracy (primary outcome), feasibility and acceptability (secondary outcomes) of an automated retinal photography and artificial intelligence (AI)-based cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment system (rpCVD) in Australian primary care settings. Participants aged 45-70 years who had recently undergone all or part of a CVD risk assessment were recruited from two general practice clinics in Victoria, Australia. After consenting, participants underwent retinal imaging using an automated fundus camera, and an rpCVD risk score was generated by a deep learning algorithm. This score was compared against the World Health Organisation (WHO) CVD risk score, which incorporates age, sex, and other clinical risk factors. The predictive accuracy of the rpCVD and WHO CVD risk scores for 10-year incident CVD events was evaluated using data from the UK Biobank, with the accuracy of each system assessed through the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Participant satisfaction was assessed through a survey, and the imaging success rate was determined by the percentage of individuals with images of sufficient quality to produce an rpCVD risk score. Of the 361 participants, 339 received an rpCVD risk score, resulting in a 93.9% imaging success rate. The rpCVD risk scores showed a moderate correlation with the WHO CVD risk scores (Pearson correlation coefficient [PCC] = 0.526, 95% CI: 0.444-0.599). Despite this, the rpCVD system, which relies solely on retinal images, demonstrated a similar level of accuracy in predicting 10-year incident CVD (AUC = 0.672, 95% CI: 0.658-0.686) compared to the WHO CVD risk score (AUC = 0.693, 95% CI: 0.680-0.707). High satisfaction rates were reported, with 92.5% of participants and 87.5% of general practitioners (GPs) expressing satisfaction with the system. The automated rpCVD system, using only retinal photographs, demonstrated predictive accuracy comparable to the WHO CVD risk score, which incorporates multiple clinical factors including age, the most heavily weighted factor for CVD prediction. This underscores the potential of the rpCVD approach as a faster, easier, and non-invasive alternative for CVD risk assessment in primary care settings, avoiding the need for more complex clinical procedures.

Identifiers

PMID39994433
PMCPMC11850881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.