Machine Learning Prediction of Cardiovascular Risk in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Using Radiomics Features from Multimodal Retinal Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to develop a machine learning (ML) algorithm capable of determining cardiovascular risk in multimodal retinal images from patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, distinguishing between moderate, high, and very high-risk levels. Radiomic features were extracted from fundus retinography, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and OCT angiography (OCTA) images. ML models were trained using these features either individually or combined with clinical data. A dataset of 597 eyes (359 individuals) was analyzed, and models trained only with radiomic features achieved AUC values of (0.79 $\pm$ 0.03) for identifying moderate risk cases from high and very high-risk cases, and (0.73 $\pm$ 0.07) for distinguishing between high and very high-risk cases. The addition of clinical variables improved all AUC values, reaching (0.99 $\pm$ 0.01) for identifying moderate risk cases and (0.95 $\pm$ 0.02) for differentiating between high and very high-risk cases. For very high CV risk, radiomics combined with OCT+OCTA metrics and ocular data achieved an AUC of (0.89 $\pm$ 0.02) without systemic data input. These results demonstrate that radiomic features obtained from multimodal retinal images are useful for discriminating and classifying CV risk labels, highlighting the potential of this oculomics approach for CV risk assessment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".