Prediction of cardiovascular risk factors from retinal fundus photographs: Validation of a deep learning algorithm in a prospective non‐interventional study in Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM) are major causes of morbidity and mortality, with growing burdens in low-income countries where they are underdiagnosed and undertreated. Advances in machine learning may provide opportunities to enhance diagnostics in settings with limited medical infrastructure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A non-interventional study was conducted to develop and validate a machine learning algorithm to estimate cardiovascular clinical and laboratory parameters. At two sites in Kenya, digital retinal fundus photographs were collected alongside blood pressure (BP), laboratory measures and medical history. The performance of machine learning models, originally trained using data from the UK Biobank, were evaluated for their ability to estimate BP, glycated haemoglobin, estimated glomerular filtration rate and diagnoses from fundus images. RESULTS: In total, 301 participants were enrolled. Compared with the UK Biobank population used for algorithm development, participants from Kenya were younger and would probably report Black/African ethnicity, with a higher body mass index and prevalence of DM and hypertension. The mean absolute error was comparable or slightly greater for systolic BP, diastolic BP, glycated haemoglobin and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The model trained to identify DM had an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.762 (0.818 in the UK Biobank) and the hypertension model had an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.765 (0.738 in the UK Biobank). CONCLUSIONS: In a Kenyan population, machine learning models estimated cardiovascular parameters with comparable or slightly lower accuracy than in the population where they were trained, suggesting model recalibration may be appropriate. This study represents an incremental step toward leveraging machine learning to make early cardiovascular screening more accessible, particularly in resource-limited settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".