Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37707707›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2023

The Use of ChatGPT to Assist in Diagnosing Glaucoma Based on Clinical Case Reports.

Mohammad Delsoz, Hina Raja, Yeganeh Madadi, Anthony A Tang, Barbara M Wirostko, Malik Y Kahook, Siamak Yousefi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
26.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

69 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammad DelsozDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 930 Madison Ave., Suite 471, Memphis, TN, 38163, USA.
Hina RajaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 930 Madison Ave., Suite 471, Memphis, TN, 38163, USA.
Yeganeh MadadiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 930 Madison Ave., Suite 471, Memphis, TN, 38163, USA.
Anthony A TangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 930 Madison Ave., Suite 471, Memphis, TN, 38163, USA.
Barbara M WirostkoJohn Moran Eye Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Malik Y KahookDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Siamak YousefiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 930 Madison Ave., Suite 471, Memphis, TN, 38163, USA. siamak.yousefi@uthsc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8633-5730
University of Tennessee Health Science Center · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

Predicting the risk of glaucoma from structural, functional, and genetic factors using artificial intelligenceR01EY033005 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI YOUSEFI, SIAMAK · 2022 to 2025
$2.4M
Improved Glaucoma Monitoring Using Artificial-Intelligence Enabled DashboardR21EY031725 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI YOUSEFI, SIAMAK · 2020 to 2022
$545k
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY033005NEI NIH HHS R01EY033005NEI NIH HHS R21 EY031725NEI NIH HHS R21EY031725
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the capabilities of large language models such as Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) to diagnose glaucoma based on specific clinical case descriptions with comparison to the performance of senior ophthalmology resident trainees.

methodsWe selected 11 cases with primary and secondary glaucoma from a publicly accessible online database of case reports. A total of four cases had primary glaucoma including open-angle, juvenile, normal-tension, and angle-closure glaucoma, while seven cases had secondary glaucoma including pseudo-exfoliation, pigment dispersion glaucoma, glaucomatocyclitic crisis, aphakic, neovascular, aqueous misdirection, and inflammatory glaucoma. We input the text of each case detail into ChatGPT and asked for provisional and differential diagnoses. We then presented the details of 11 cases to three senior ophthalmology residents and recorded their provisional and differential diagnoses. We finally evaluated the responses based on the correct diagnoses and evaluated agreements.

resultsThe provisional diagnosis based on ChatGPT was correct in eight out of 11 (72.7%) cases and three ophthalmology residents were correct in six (54.5%), eight (72.7%), and eight (72.7%) cases, respectively. The agreement between ChatGPT and the first, second, and third ophthalmology residents were 9, 7, and 7, respectively.

conclusionsThe accuracy of ChatGPT in diagnosing patients with primary and secondary glaucoma, using specific case examples, was similar or better than senior ophthalmology residents. With further development, ChatGPT may have the potential to be used in clinical care settings, such as primary care offices, for triaging and in eye care clinical practices to provide objective and quick diagnoses of patients with glaucoma.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence (AI)ChatGPTDifferential diagnosisGlaucomaLarge language models (LLM)Provisional diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID37707707
PMCPMC10640454
OpenAlexW4386726071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.