ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of Gemini Advanced and ChatGPT 4.0's Performances on the Ophthalmology Resident Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program (OKAP) Examination Review Question Banks.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating Large Language Models in Ophthalmology: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the Performance of ChatGPT on Board-Style Examination Questions in Ophthalmology: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical systems · 2025Pooled it
- Large Language Models Approximate Inter-Expert Agreement in Glaucoma Suspect and Glaucoma Classification from Multimodal Data.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- From adoption to interaction: examining human-GenAI engagement patterns, ethical tensions, and educational trade-offs in nursing education.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Comparative Performance of Gemini 3 Pro and GPT-5 Family Models on Ophthalmology Board-Style Questions.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Large Language Models in Ophthalmology: A Bibliographic Analysis.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Performance of 4 artificial intelligence chatbots in responding to multiple choice questions in operative dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluating GPT-4 Responses on Scars or Keloids for Patient Education: Large Language Model Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Clinical reasoning with machines: evaluating the interpretive depth of AI in urological case assessments.BMC urology · 2026Observational
- Review
- Comparative performance of neurosurgery-specific, peer-reviewed versus general AI chatbots in bilingual board examinations: evaluating accuracy, consistency, and error minimization strategies.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- A comparative analysis of DeepSeek R1, DeepSeek-R1-Lite, OpenAi o1 Pro, and Grok 3 performance on ophthalmology board-style questions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Preparing for Vascular Surgery Board Certification: A Comparative Study Using Large Language Models.Cureus · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for posterior capsule opacification.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Article
- OpenAI o1 Large Language Model Outperforms GPT-4o, Gemini 1.5 Flash, and Human Test Takers on Ophthalmology Board-Style Questions.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background With advancements in natural language processing, tools such as Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformers (ChatGPT) version 4.0 and Google Bard's Gemini Advanced are being increasingly evaluated for their potential in various medical applications. The objective of this study was to systematically assess the performance of these language learning models (LLMs) on both image and non-image-based questions within the specialized field of Ophthalmology. We used a review question bank for the Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program (OKAP) used by ophthalmology residents nationally to prepare for the Ophthalmology Board Exam to assess the accuracy and performance of ChatGPT and Gemini Advanced. Methodology A total of 260 randomly generated multiple-choice questions from the OphthoQuestions question bank were run through ChatGPT and Gemini Advanced. A simulated 260-question OKAP examination was created at random from the bank. Question-specific data were analyzed, including overall percent correct, subspecialty accuracy, whether the question was "high yield," difficulty (1-4), and question type (e.g., image, text). To compare the performance of ChatGPT-4 and Gemini on the difficulty of questions, we utilized the standard deviation of user answer choices to determine question difficulty. In this study, a statistical analysis of Google Sheets was conducted using two-tailed t-tests with unequal variance to compare the performance of ChatGPT-4.0 and Google's Gemini Advanced across various question types, subspecialties, and difficulty levels. Results In total, 259 of the 260 questions were included in the study as one question used a video that any form of ChatGPT could not interpret as of May 1, 2024. For text-only questions, ChatGPT-4.0.0 correctly answered 57.14% (148/259, p < 0.018), and Gemini Advanced correctly answered 46.72% (121/259, p < 0.018). Both versions answered most questions without a prompt and would have received a below-average score on the OKAP. Moreover, there were 27 questions utilizing a secondary prompt in ChatGPT-4.0 compared to 67 questions in Gemini Advanced. ChatGPT-4.0 performed 68.99% on easier questions (<2 on a scale from 1-4) and 44.96% on harder questions (>2 on a scale from 1-4). On the other hand, Gemini Advanced performed 49.61% on easier questions (<2 on a scale from 1-4) and 44.19% on harder questions (>2 on a scale from 1-4). There was a statistically significant difference in accuracy between ChatGPT-4.0 and Gemini Advanced for easy (p < 0.0015) but not for hard (p < 0.55) questions. For image-only questions, ChatGPT-4.0 correctly answered 39.58% (19/48, p < 0.013), and Gemini Advanced correctly answered 33.33% (16/48, p < 0.022), resulting in a statistically insignificant difference in accuracy between ChatGPT-4.0 and Gemini Advanced (p < 0.530). A comparison against text-only and image-based questions demonstrated a statistically significant difference in accuracy for both ChatGPT-4.0 (p < 0.013) and Gemini Advanced (p < 0.022). Conclusions This study provides evidence that ChatGPT-4.0 performs better on the OKAP-style exams and is improved compared to Gemini Advanced within the context of ophthalmic multiple-choice questions. This may show an opportunity for increased worth for ChatGPT in ophthalmic medical education. While showing promise within medical education, caution should be used as a more detailed evaluation of reliability is needed.
Indexed as
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.