Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41552655›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology science2026

Performance of GPT-5 Frontier Models in Ophthalmology Question Answering.

Fares Antaki, David Mikhail, Daniel Milad, Danny A Mammo, Sumit Sharma, Sunil K Srivastava, Bing Yu Chen, Samir Touma, Mertcan Sevgi, Jonathan El-Khoury and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Fares AntakiCole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
David MikhailTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Daniel MiladDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Danny A MammoCole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Sumit SharmaCole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Sunil K SrivastavaCole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Bing Yu ChenNeurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Samir ToumaDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Mertcan SevgiInstitute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, UK.
Jonathan El-KhouryDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Pearse A KeaneInstitute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, UK.
Qingyu ChenDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Data Science, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Yih Chung ThamDepartment of Ophthalmology, Centre for Innovation and Precision Eye Health, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Renaud DuvalDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

Addressing Factual Inaccuracy and Unfaithful Reasoning of Large Language Models in Biomedicine and HealthcareR01LM014604 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Qingyu Chen · 2024 to 2026
$1.1M
Natural language processing and medical imaging analysis for multi-modality computer assisted diagnosis of ophthalmic diseasesR00LM014024 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Qingyu Chen · 2024 to 2026
$747k
NLM NIH HHS R00 LM014024NLM NIH HHS R01 LM014604
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Novel large language models (LLMs) such as Generative Pretrained Transformer-5 (GPT-5) integrate advanced reasoning capabilities that may enhance performance on complex medical question-answering tasks. For this latest generation of reasoning models, the configurations that maximize both accuracy and cost-efficiency have yet to be established. Our objective was to evaluate the performance and cost-accuracy trade-offs of OpenAI's GPT-5 compared with previous generation LLMs on ophthalmic question answering. Design: Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology. Participants: Generative Pretrained Transformer-5 is a publicly available LLM. Methods: In August 2025, 12 configurations of OpenAI's GPT-5 series (3 model tiers across 4 reasoning effort settings) were evaluated alongside o1-high, o3-high, and GPT-4o, using 260 closed-access multiple-choice questions from the American Academy of Ophthalmology Basic Clinical Science Course data set. The study did not include human participants. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was accuracy on the 260-item ophthalmology multiple-choice question set for each model configuration. The secondary outcomes included head-to-head ranking of configurations using a Bradley-Terry model applied to paired win/loss comparisons of answer accuracy, and evaluation of generated natural language rationales using a reference-anchored, pairwise LLM-as-a-judge framework. Additional analyses assessed the accuracy-cost trade-off by calculating mean per-question cost from token usage and identifying Pareto-efficient configurations. Results: The configuration GPT-5-high achieved the highest accuracy (0.965; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.942-0.985), significantly outperforming all GPT-5-nano variants ( Conclusions: This study benchmarks the GPT-5 series on a high-quality ophthalmology question-answering data set, demonstrating that GPT-5 with high reasoning effort achieved near-perfect accuracy and outperformed prior reasoning LLMs. This study also introduces an autograder framework for scalable, automated evaluation of LLM-generated answers against reference standards in ophthalmology. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceFoundation modelsGPT-5Large language modelsOphthalmology

Identifiers

PMID41552655
PMCPMC12811449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.