Evaluation of Responses to Questions About Keratoconus Using ChatGPT-4.0, Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot: A Comparative Study of Large Language Models on Keratoconus.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1097/ICL.0000000000001158
Suleyman Demir
{"title":"Evaluation of Responses to Questions About Keratoconus Using ChatGPT-4.0, Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot: A Comparative Study of Large Language Models on Keratoconus.","authors":"Suleyman Demir","doi":"10.1097/ICL.0000000000001158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used today and are becoming increasingly important for providing accurate clinical information to patients and physicians. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of generative pre-trained transforme-4.0 (ChatGPT-4.0), Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot LLMs in responding to patient questions regarding keratoconus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The LLMs' responses to the 25 most common questions about keratoconus asked by real-life patients were blindly rated by two ophthalmologists using a 5-point Likert scale. In addition, the DISCERN scale was used to evaluate the responses of the language models in terms of reliability, and the Flesch reading ease and Flesch-Kincaid grade level indices were used to determine readability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ChatGPT-4.0 provided more detailed and accurate answers to patients' questions about keratoconus than Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot, with 92% of the answers belonging to the \"agree\" or \"strongly agree\" categories. Significant differences were observed between all three LLMs on the Likert scale (P<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although the answers of ChatGPT-4.0 to questions about keratoconus were more complex for patients than those of other language programs, the information provided was reliable and accurate.</p>","PeriodicalId":50457,"journal":{"name":"Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye & Contact Lens-Science and Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000001158","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used today and are becoming increasingly important for providing accurate clinical information to patients and physicians. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of generative pre-trained transforme-4.0 (ChatGPT-4.0), Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot LLMs in responding to patient questions regarding keratoconus.

Methods: The LLMs' responses to the 25 most common questions about keratoconus asked by real-life patients were blindly rated by two ophthalmologists using a 5-point Likert scale. In addition, the DISCERN scale was used to evaluate the responses of the language models in terms of reliability, and the Flesch reading ease and Flesch-Kincaid grade level indices were used to determine readability.

Results: ChatGPT-4.0 provided more detailed and accurate answers to patients' questions about keratoconus than Google Gemini and Microsoft Copilot, with 92% of the answers belonging to the "agree" or "strongly agree" categories. Significant differences were observed between all three LLMs on the Likert scale (P<0.001).

Conclusions: Although the answers of ChatGPT-4.0 to questions about keratoconus were more complex for patients than those of other language programs, the information provided was reliable and accurate.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
150
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Eye & Contact Lens: Science and Clinical Practice is the official journal of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists (CLAO), an international educational association for anterior segment research and clinical practice of interest to ophthalmologists, optometrists, and other vision care providers and researchers. Focusing especially on contact lenses, it also covers dry eye disease, MGD, infections, toxicity of drops and contact lens care solutions, topography, cornea surgery and post-operative care, optics, refractive surgery and corneal stability (eg, UV cross-linking). Peer-reviewed and published six times annually, it is a highly respected scientific journal in its field.
期刊最新文献
Artificial Doctors: Performance of Chatbots as a Tool for Patient Education on Keratoconus. Comparative Analysis of Cosmetic and Functional Outcomes in Corneal Tattooing (Keratopigmentation) versus Ocular Prosthesis. Drug Delivery in PROSE Device as Alternative to Frequent Drop Administration in Severe Ocular Surface Disease. Factors Contributing to Follow-up Nonadherence After Infectious Keratitis Diagnosis. Quality of Life Survey Using NEI VFQ-25 in Japanese Patients With Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1