Comparative Performance of the Leading Large Language Models in Answering Complex Rhinoplasty Consultation Questions.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-15 DOI:10.1089/fpsam.2024.0206
Khodayar Goshtasbi, Corliss Best, Bethany Powers, Harry Ching, Norman J Pastorek, Donald Altman, Peter Adamson, Mark Krugman, Brian J F Wong
{"title":"Comparative Performance of the Leading Large Language Models in Answering Complex Rhinoplasty Consultation Questions.","authors":"Khodayar Goshtasbi, Corliss Best, Bethany Powers, Harry Ching, Norman J Pastorek, Donald Altman, Peter Adamson, Mark Krugman, Brian J F Wong","doi":"10.1089/fpsam.2024.0206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Various large language models (LLMs) can provide human-level medical discussions, but they have not been compared regarding rhinoplasty knowledge. <b>Objective:</b> To compare the leading LLMs in answering complex rhinoplasty consultation questions as evaluated by plastic surgeons. <b>Methods:</b> Ten open-ended rhinoplasty consultation questions were presented to ChatGPT-4o, Google Gemini, Claude, and Meta-AI LLMs. The responses were randomized and ranked by seven rhinoplasty-specializing plastic surgeons (1 = worst, 4 = best) considering their quality. Textual readability was analyzed via Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG). <b>Results:</b> Claude provided the top answers for seven questions while ChatGPT provided the top answers for three questions. In overall collective scoring, Claude provided the best answers with 224 points, followed by ChatGPT's 200, Meta's 138, and Gemini's 138 scores. Claude (mean score/question 3.20 ± 1.00) significantly outperformed all the other models (<i>p</i> < 0.05), while ChatGPT (mean score/question 2.86 ± 0.94) outperformed Meta and Gemini. Meta and Gemini performed similarly. Meta had a significantly lower FKG than Claude and ChatGPT and a significantly lower FRE than ChatGPT. <b>Conclusion:</b> According to ratings by seven rhinoplasty-specializing surgeons, Claude provided the best answers for a set of complex rhinoplasty consultation questions, followed by ChatGPT. Future studies are warranted to continue comparing these models as they evolve.</p>","PeriodicalId":48487,"journal":{"name":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2024.0206","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Various large language models (LLMs) can provide human-level medical discussions, but they have not been compared regarding rhinoplasty knowledge. Objective: To compare the leading LLMs in answering complex rhinoplasty consultation questions as evaluated by plastic surgeons. Methods: Ten open-ended rhinoplasty consultation questions were presented to ChatGPT-4o, Google Gemini, Claude, and Meta-AI LLMs. The responses were randomized and ranked by seven rhinoplasty-specializing plastic surgeons (1 = worst, 4 = best) considering their quality. Textual readability was analyzed via Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG). Results: Claude provided the top answers for seven questions while ChatGPT provided the top answers for three questions. In overall collective scoring, Claude provided the best answers with 224 points, followed by ChatGPT's 200, Meta's 138, and Gemini's 138 scores. Claude (mean score/question 3.20 ± 1.00) significantly outperformed all the other models (p < 0.05), while ChatGPT (mean score/question 2.86 ± 0.94) outperformed Meta and Gemini. Meta and Gemini performed similarly. Meta had a significantly lower FKG than Claude and ChatGPT and a significantly lower FRE than ChatGPT. Conclusion: According to ratings by seven rhinoplasty-specializing surgeons, Claude provided the best answers for a set of complex rhinoplasty consultation questions, followed by ChatGPT. Future studies are warranted to continue comparing these models as they evolve.

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
主要大型语言模型在回答复杂鼻整形咨询问题中的比较性能。
背景:各种大型语言模型(llm)可以提供人类水平的医学讨论,但它们尚未在鼻整形知识方面进行比较。目的:比较主要LLMs在回答整形外科医生评估的复杂鼻整形咨询问题方面的表现。方法:向chatgpt - 40,谷歌Gemini, Claude和Meta-AI LLMs提出10个开放式鼻整形咨询问题。这些回答是随机的,并由7位专门从事鼻整形手术的整形医生根据他们的质量(1 =最差,4 =最好)对他们进行排名。通过Flesch Reading Ease (FRE)和Flesch- kincaid Grade (FKG)分析文本可读性。结果:Claude给出了7个问题的最佳答案,ChatGPT给出了3个问题的最佳答案。在整体得分方面,Claude给出了224分的最佳答案,其次是ChatGPT的200分,Meta的138分,Gemini的138分。Claude(平均得分/问题3.20±1.00)显著优于其他所有模型(p < 0.05), ChatGPT(平均得分/问题2.86±0.94)优于Meta和Gemini。Meta和Gemini的表现相似。Meta的FKG显著低于Claude和ChatGPT, FRE显著低于ChatGPT。结论:根据7位鼻整形专科医生的评分,Claude对一组复杂的鼻整形咨询问题提供了最佳答案,其次是ChatGPT。未来的研究有理由继续比较这些模型的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
30.00%
发文量
159
期刊最新文献
Association Between Symptoms of Body Dysmorphia and Social Media Usage: A Cross-Generational Comparison. Maximizing Septal Cartilage and Bone Harvest for Autologous Nasal Septal Grafts in Congenital Cleft Nasal Deformity. Bell's Palsy-Unclear Terminology and Definitions Impede Progress. Dorsal Hump Reduction and Keystone Injury in Human Anatomic Specimens. Effectiveness of Isotretinoin Administration in Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review.
×
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