ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2024
Artificial intelligence derived large language model in decision-making process in uveitis.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating Large Language Models in Ophthalmology: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Performance of GPT-based large language models in hepatocellular carcinoma stratification: liver function assessment, BCLC staging, and treatment recommendations.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Large Language Models in Ophthalmology: A Bibliographic Analysis.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Applications of Large Language Models in Glaucoma: A Scoping Review.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Opportunities and Challenges of Chatbots in Ophthalmology: A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Performance analysis of an emergency triage system in ophthalmology using a customized CHATBOT.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUveitis is the ophthalmic subfield dealing with a broad range of intraocular inflammatory diseases. With the raising importance of LLM such as ChatGPT and their potential use in the medical field, this research explores the strengths and weaknesses of its applicability in the subfield of uveitis.
methodsA series of highly clinically relevant questions were asked three consecutive times (attempts 1, 2 and 3) of the LLM regarding current uveitis cases. The answers were classified on whether they were accurate and sufficient, partially accurate and sufficient or inaccurate and insufficient. Statistical analysis included descriptive analysis, normality distribution, non-parametric test and reliability tests. References were checked for their correctness in different medical databases.
resultsThe data showed non-normal distribution. Data between subgroups (attempts 1, 2 and 3) was comparable (Kruskal-Wallis H test, p-value = 0.7338). There was a moderate agreement between attempt 1 and attempt 2 (Cohen's kappa, ĸ = 0.5172) as well as between attempt 2 and attempt 3 (Cohen's kappa, ĸ = 0.4913). There was a fair agreement between attempt 1 and attempt 3 (Cohen's kappa, ĸ = 0.3647). The average agreement was moderate (Cohen's kappa, ĸ = 0.4577). Between the three attempts together, there was a moderate agreement (Fleiss' kappa, ĸ = 0.4534). A total of 52 references were generated by the LLM. 22 references (42.3%) were found to be accurate and correctly cited. Another 22 references (42.3%) could not be located in any of the searched databases. The remaining 8 references (15.4%) were found to exist, but were either misinterpreted or incorrectly cited by the LLM.
conclusionOur results demonstrate the significant potential of LLMs in uveitis. However, their implementation requires rigorous training and comprehensive testing for specific medical tasks. We also found out that the references made by ChatGPT 4.o were in most cases incorrect. LLMs are likely to become invaluable tools in shaping the future of ophthalmology, enhancing clinical decision-making and patient care.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.