Automated Diabetic Screening via Anterior Segment Ocular Imaging: A Deep Learning and Explainable AI Approach
Organizations: BiogentX (biogentx.com, Renala Khurd, District Okara, Punjab, Pakistan. · Department of Computer Science, Rhineland-Palatinate Technical University of Kaiserslautern-Landau, Kaiserslautern, 67663, Germany. · German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence, Kaiserslautern, 67663, Germany. · Intelligentx GmbH (intelligentx.com), Kaiserslautern, Germany. · Department of Core Informatics, Graduate School of Informatics ,Osaka Metropolitan University, Saka, 599-8531, Japan.
Abstract
Diabetic retinopathy screening traditionally relies on fundus photography, requiring specialized equipment and expertise often unavailable in primary care and resource limited settings. We developed and validated a deep learning (DL) system for automated diabetic classification using anterior segment ocular imaging a readily accessible alternative utilizing standard photography equipment. The system leverages visible biomarkers in the iris, sclera, and conjunctiva that correlate with systemic diabetic status. We systematically evaluated five contemporary architectures (EfficientNet-V2-S with self-supervised learning (SSL), Vision Transformer, Swin Transformer, ConvNeXt-Base, and ResNet-50) on 2,640 clinically annotated anterior segment images spanning Normal, Controlled Diabetic, and Uncontrolled Diabetic categories. A tailored preprocessing pipeline combining specular reflection mitigation and contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization (CLAHE) was implemented to enhance subtle vascular and textural patterns critical for classification. SSL using SimCLR on domain specific ocular images substantially improved model performance.EfficientNet-V2-S with SSL achieved optimal performance with an F1-score of 98.21%, precision of 97.90%, and recall of 98.55% a substantial improvement over ImageNet only initialization (94.63% F1). Notably, the model attained near perfect precision (100%) for Normal classification, critical for minimizing unnecessary clinical referrals.
Figures & tables
| Reference | Approach | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Gulshan et al. [ 4 ] | Deep CNN on fundus images (128K images) | Requires specialized fundus cameras (50K) and mydriatic imaging; not accessible in primary care settings |
| Babenko et al. [ 2 ] | External eye photos for systemic disease (145K patients) | AUC 71–82% for diabetic disease; substantially lower than our 98.21% F1-score |
| Babenko et al. [ 22 ] | External eye photos → multi-organ systemic biomarkers (123K images) | Trained on diabetic screening populations only; limited generalizability to non-diabetic cohorts |
| Wu et al. [ 25 ] | Multitask EfficientNet-B2 on heterogeneous fundus datasets | Fundus-based; requires dilation; not applicable to anterior segment screening |
| Gu et al. [ 24 ] | Smartphone DL app for anterior segment diseases | Low sensitivity (0.29) for abnormality detection; small training dataset (313 usable images) |
| Li et al. [ 3 ] | Iris/sclera analysis for diabetes | Manual feature extraction; no end-to-end learning; AUC 67–70% for HbA1c prediction |
| Category | Clinical Definition |
|---|---|
| Normal | Non diabetic individuals with no history of diabetes mellitus. HbA1c ¡5.7%, fasting glucose ¡100 mg/dL. No anterior segment biomarkers: absence of scleral vessel tortuosity, normal conjunctival vasculature, no iris structural changes. |
| Controlled | Diagnosed diabetic patients under regular pharmacological management with good glycemic control. HbA1c ¡7.0%, consistent medication adherence. Minimal or absent anterior segment manifestations. |
| Uncontrolled | Diagnosed diabetic patients with poor glycemic control due to irregular medication adherence or treatment resistance. HbA1c 7.0%. Visible ocular biomarkers: scleral vessel tortuosity, conjunctival hyperemia, iris structural alterations. |
| Item | Description | Section | Pass |
| Title & Abstract | |||
| Title | Prediction model for diabetic screening | Title | Yes |
| Abstract | Objectives, methods, results, conclusions | Abstract | Yes |
| Introduction | |||
| Background | Diabetic screening challenges, SSL for medical imaging | Sec. 1, 1.1 | Yes |
| Objectives | Study contributions and innovations | Sec. 1.2 | Yes |
| Initialization | F1 | Precision | Recall | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ImageNet Only | 0.9463 | 0.9397 | 0.9550 | 0.9489 |
| ImageNet + SSL | 0.9821 | 0.9790 | 0.9855 | 0.9830 |
| Improvement | +3.58% | +3.93% | +3.05% | +3.41% |
| SSL-Pretrained | Baseline | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class | F1 | Prec | Rec | F1 | Prec | Rec |
| Control | 0.99 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.96 |
| Normal | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.92 | 0.97 |
| Uncontrolled | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.94 |
| Macro Avg | 0.9821 | 0.9790 | 0.9855 | 0.9463 | 0.9397 | 0.9550 |
| Model | F1 | Precision | Recall | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ResNet-50 [ 28 ] | 0.8855 | 0.8867 | 0.8848 | 0.8977 |
| ConvNeXt-Base [ 26 ] | 0.9302 | 0.9349 | 0.9278 | 0.9375 |
| ViT-B/16 [ 29 ] | 0.9380 | 0.9328 | 0.9441 | 0.9432 |
| Swin-V2-Base [ 30 ] | 0.9380 | 0.9328 | 0.9441 | 0.9432 |
| EfficientNet (ImageNet) [ 27 ] | 0.9463 | 0.9397 | 0.9550 | 0.9489 |
| EfficientNet (SSL) | 0.9821 | 0.9790 | 0.9855 | 0.9830 |
| Configuration | F1 | Precision | Recall | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline (raw data, ImageNet init.) | 30.69 | 30.53 | 31.91 | 35.35 |
| + Data Cleaning | 88.62 | 87.84 | 89.77 | 89.20 |
| + Data Augmentation (4 ) | 94.63 | 93.97 | 95.50 | 94.89 |
| + SSL Pretraining (SimCLR) | 98.21 | 97.90 | 98.55 | 98.30 |
| Total Improvement | +67.52 | +67.37 | +66.64 | +62.95 |
| Abbreviation | Definition |
|---|---|
| Clinical & Medical | |
| HbA1c | Glycated Hemoglobin A1c (diabetes marker) |
| CLAHE | Contrast-Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization |
| HSV | Hue, Saturation, Value (color space) |
| LAB | Lightness, A, B (color space) |
| IRB | Institutional Review Board |