MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117236052 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_098859

Retinal Artificial Intelligence‐based Model Identifies Non‐demented Elderly Subjects at Risk of Alzheimer's Disease

2025· article· en· W7117236052 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anran Ran, Y. M. Harry Ng, Bonnie Y.K. Lam, Huijing Zheng, Lisa WC Au, Alexander Yl Lau, A. C. L. Lam, Xiaoyan Hu, Ha Ying Chiu, Hyun‐Jeong Ko, C. S.K. CHEUNG, Vincent C.T. Mok

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseRetinalDementiaMacular degenerationAlzheimer's diseaseRisk factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: RetinAD is a validated deep learning model for differentiating between Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia and cognitively unimpaired subjects based on analyzing retinal photographs. Since certain AD-related retinal changes (e.g., microvasculopathy) may start to develop years to decades before the onset of cognitive symptoms, we hypothesized that RetinAD may also identify retinal microvasculopathy among non-demented elderly subjects. We aimed to compare measures of retinal vessel network between "positive" and "negative" cases as classified by RetinAD among elderly non-demented elderly subjects. METHOD: We recruited community subjects who were participants in the BEAT AD (Brain Health Education And Tailor-made Measures for Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease) service programme in Hong Kong. This programme invites non-demented community dwelling subjects (59-80 years old) with subjective cognitive decline (SCD). It assesses their cognitive performances using Montreal Cognitive Assessment-5 minutes (MoCA-5) and on their control in the modifiable risk factors of AD. It also provides tailor-made recommendation for the subjects of how to optimize those risk factors that are not well controlled. We obtained fundus pictures using the Topcon NW500 non-mydriatic retinal camera. We classified subjects into "positive" or "negative" using RetinAD. We conducted quantitative measurements of retinal vessels using the Singapore I Vessel Assessment (SIVA) software. RESULT: Among the 187 recruited subjects with SCD, 29 (15.5%) and 158 (84.5%) subjects were classified as "positive" and "negative", respectively. Subjects who were classified as "positive" were older (mean age 71.21 versus [vs] 67.59; p = <0.01) than those who were classified as "negative". There was no significant difference in MoCA scores between "positive" (22.79) and "negative" subjects (23.74, p = 0.28). Analysis of the retinal vessel network showed that "positive" subjects had a significantly higher branching coefficient arterioles (1.64 vs 1.49) and branching coefficient venules (1.49 vs 1.32) than that of "negative" subjects. The difference remained significant (p = 0.033) for the branching coefficient venules after being adjusted to age and mean arterial pressure. CONCLUSION: RetinAD identified non-demented elderly who had worse retinal microvasculopathy and biologically older brains. Findings suggested that RetinAD may be able to identify elderly subjects who are at risk of developing AD dementia in the future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207