Back

Multimodal prediction of visual improvement in diabetic macular edema using real-world electronic health records and optical coherence tomography images

Sun, S.; Cai, C. X.; Fan, R.; You, S.; Tran, D.; Rao, P. K.; Suchard, M. A.; Wang, Y.; Lee, C. S.; Lee, A. Y.; Zhang, L.

2026-04-24 health informatics
10.64898/2026.04.23.26351616 medRxiv
Show abstract

Multimodal learning has the potential to improve clinical prediction by integrating complementary data sources, but the incremental value of imaging beyond structured electronic health record (EHR) data remains unclear in real-world settings. We developed a multimodal survival modeling framework integrating optical coherence tomography (OCT) and EHR data to predict time to visual improvement in patients with diabetic macular edema (DME), and evaluated how different ophthalmic foundation model representations contribute to prognostic performance. In a retrospective cohort of 973 patients (1,450 eyes) receiving anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy, we compared multimodal models combining 22,227 EHR variables with 196,402 OCT images, with OCT embeddings derived from three ophthalmic foundation models (RETFound, EyeCLIP, and VisionFM). The EHR-only model showed minimal prognostic discrimination (C-index 0.50 [95% CI, 0.45-0.55]). Incorporating OCT improved performance, with the magnitude of improvement depending on the representation. EHR+RETFound achieved the strongest performance (C-index 0.59 [0.54-0.65]), followed by EHR+EyeCLIP (0.57 [0.52-0.62]) and EHR+VisionFM (0.56 [0.51-0.61]). Multimodal models, particularly EHR+RETFound, demonstrated improved risk stratification with clearer separation of Kaplan-Meier curves. Partial information decomposition revealed that prognostic information was dominated by modality-specific contributions, with OCT and EHR providing largely distinct signals and minimal shared information. The magnitude of OCT-specific contribution varied across foundation models and aligned with observed performance differences. These findings indicate that OCT provides complementary prognostic value beyond structured clinical data, but gains are modest and depend strongly on representation choice. Our results highlight both the promise of multimodal modeling for personalized prognosis and the need for rigorous, context-specific evaluation of foundation models in real-world clinical settings.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
42.8%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 14%
6.9%
3
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.2%
50% of probability mass above
4
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.6%
5
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 35%
4.3%
6
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.9%
7
Patterns
70 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.9%
8
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
9
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
10
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
11
Ophthalmology Science
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
12
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.8%
13
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
14
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
15
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.9%
17
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
18
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
19
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.7%
20
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.5%
22
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 39%
0.5%
24
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
25
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.5%