> Given the retinal image of one patient who (up to 5 years) later experienced a major CV event (such as a heart attack) and the image of another patient who did not, our algorithm could pick out the patient who had the CV event 70% of the time.
To put that in perspective, in this study, a random choice would be right 50% of the time.
So this is interesting, but would it be useful diagnostic tool?
To put that in perspective, in this study, a random choice would be right 50% of the time.
So this is interesting, but would it be useful diagnostic tool?