Medical foundation models, pre-trained with large-scale clinical data, demonstrate strong performance in diverse clinically relevant applications. RETFound, trained on nearly one million retinal images, exemplifies this approach in applications with retinal images. However, the emergence of increasingly powerful and multifold larger generalist foundation models such as DINOv2 and DINOv3 raises the question of whether domain-specific pre-training remains essential, and if so, what gap persists. To investigate this, we systematically evaluated the adaptability of DINOv2 and DINOv3 in retinal image applications, compared to two specialist RETFound models, RETFound-MAE and RETFound-DINOv2. We assessed performance on ocular disease detection and systemic disease prediction using two adaptation strategies: fine-tuning and linear probing. Data efficiency and adaptation efficiency were further analysed to characterise trade-offs between predictive performance and computational cost. Our results show that although scaling generalist models yields strong adaptability across diverse tasks, RETFound-DINOv2 consistently outperforms these generalist foundation models in ocular-disease detection and oculomics tasks, demonstrating stronger generalisability and data efficiency. These findings suggest that specialist retinal foundation models remain the most effective choice for clinical applications, while the narrowing gap with generalist foundation models suggests that continued data and model scaling can deliver domain-relevant gains and position them as strong foundations for future medical foundation models.
@article{arxiv.2509.03421,
title = {Generalist versus Specialist Vision Foundation Models for Ocular Disease and Oculomics},
author = {Yukun Zhou and Paul Nderitu and Jocelyn Hui Lin Goh and Justin Engelmann and Siegfried K. Wagner and Anran Ran and Hongyang Jiang and Lie Ju and Ke Zou and Sahana Srinivasan and Hyunmin Kim and Takahiro Ninomiya and Zheyuan Wang and Gabriel Dawei Yang and Eden Ruffell and Dominic Williamson and Rui Santos and Gabor Mark Somfai and Carol Y. Cheung and Tien Yin Wong and Daniel C. Alexander and Yih Chung Tham and Pearse A. Keane},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.03421},
year = {2025}
}