Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42668902›Full record

ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2026

Assessing Guideline Knowledge Alignment of Large Language Models in Ophthalmology: A Preclinical Benchmarking Study on KLEx Evidence-Based Guidelines.

Hongxia Lu, Yan Huo, Ruisi Xie, Zhengyuan Qu, Yutong Li, Shengjin Wang, Haohan Zou, Yan Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Hongxia LuClinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China, tijmu.edu.cn.
Yan HuoTianjin Eye Hospital, Tianjin Key Lab of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tianjin Eye Institute, Nankai University Affiliated Eye Hospital, Tianjin, China, oio.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7368-4621
Ruisi XieTianjin Eye Hospital, Tianjin Key Lab of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tianjin Eye Institute, Nankai University Affiliated Eye Hospital, Tianjin, China, oio.cn.
Zhengyuan QuClinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China, tijmu.edu.cn.
Yutong LiClinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China, tijmu.edu.cn.
Shengjin WangDepartment of Electronic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, tsinghua.edu.cn.
Haohan ZouTianjin Eye Hospital, Tianjin Key Lab of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tianjin Eye Institute, Nankai University Affiliated Eye Hospital, Tianjin, China, oio.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0588-9753
Yan WangClinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China, tijmu.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1257-6635

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the guideline knowledge alignment of two large language models (LLMs), GPT-5.5 Instant and DeepSeek-V4, and to determine their preclinical reliability as reference tools in refractive surgery. Methods: Using the 38 evidence-based recommendations of the international keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) guidelines as the gold standard, both LLMs were evaluated in their default configurations. Two ophthalmologists independently assessed the clinical safety and medical accuracy of the model responses using a 5-point Likert scale (1-5 points). Agreement between each model's recommendation strength and the guideline was quantified by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), structural reliability by the DISCERN scale, and readability by the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) indices. Results: Likert ratings did not differ between GPT-5.5 Instant (4.96 ± 0.206) and DeepSeek-V4 (4.89 ± 0.385; Conclusion: Both models aligned closely with the guidelines, with significant concordance in GRADE-based recommendation strength. They may serve as preclinical reference tools in refractive surgery but not as a substitute for specialist judgment.

Indexed as

DeepSeek-V4evidence-based guidelinesGPT-5.5 Instantkeratorefractive lenticule extractionlarge language models

Identifiers

PMID42668902
PMCPMC13525438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.