Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42684491›Full record

Trial reportInternational ophthalmology2026

Evaluation of a cornea-specialized large language model for diagnostic and management accuracy in complex corneal cases.

David Mikhail, Daniel Milad, Fares Antaki, Jason Milad, Fady Sedarous, Rachel Ann Martin, Louis Vaudoisey, Jonathan El-Khoury, Samir Jabbour, Renaud Duval and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

David MikhailTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Daniel MiladDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Fares AntakiDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jason MiladFaculty of Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
Fady SedarousDepartment of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1er étage - Pavillon D - porte D0120, 1051 Rue Sanguinet, Montreal, QC, H2X 3E4, Canada.
Rachel Ann MartinDepartment of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1er étage - Pavillon D - porte D0120, 1051 Rue Sanguinet, Montreal, QC, H2X 3E4, Canada.
Louis VaudoiseyDepartment of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1er étage - Pavillon D - porte D0120, 1051 Rue Sanguinet, Montreal, QC, H2X 3E4, Canada.
Jonathan El-KhouryDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Samir JabbourDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Renaud DuvalDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Mona Harissi-DagherDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada. monadagher@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate whether a cornea-specialized large language model (LLM) enhanced with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves clinicians' diagnostic and management accuracy in complex corneal cases compared to a general-purpose GPT-4o model and unaided clinician performance.

methodsThis prospective, randomized, masked evaluation study involved three cornea trainees who each independently reviewed 39 real-world corneal cases under three experimental conditions: unaided, GPT-4o-assisted, and assisted by a cornea-specialized GPT-4o model. The cornea-specialized model was constructed by embedding over 200 publicly available Wikipedia articles into GPT-4o's RAG framework. Participants provided open-ended diagnoses and selected the next-step management options (multiple choice). They were allowed up to three GPT-4o queries per case, and the AI-assisted arms were randomized to minimize bias. Accuracy for both tasks was compared against expert reference standards using McNemar's test.

resultsDiagnostic accuracy was 48.7%, 20.5%, and 38.5% unaided, improving to 69.2%, 46.2%, and 59.0% with general GPT-4o (p<0.04). The cornea-specialized GPT-4o further improved accuracy to 71.8%, 48.7%, and 74.4%, with improvements over unaided performance for all clinicians (p<0.01). For next-step decisions, unaided accuracy was 76.9%, 87.2%, and 59.0%. With the specialized model, Ophthalmologist 3 improved to 71.8% (p<0.05), Ophthalmologist 1 remained high at 82.1%, and Ophthalmologist 2 declined to 64.1% (p<0.05).

conclusionsA cornea-specialized LLM enhanced with RAG improved diagnostic accuracy in complex corneal cases, particularly among clinicians with lower baseline performance. Effects on management accuracy were inconsistent. Future studies should explore the use of open-ended management tasks and examine whether smaller, curated retrieval corpora yield better model performance.

Indexed as

CorneaCorneal DiseasesLarge Language ModelsAdultFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesArtificial intelligenceCorneaLarge language modelsRetrieval augmented generation

Identifiers

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.