Introduction Large language models such as OpenAI's (San Francisco, CA) ChatGPT-3.5 hold immense potential to augment self-directed learning in medicine, but concerns have risen regarding its accuracy in specialized fields. This study compares ChatGPT-3.5 with an internet search engine in their ability to define the Randleman criteria and its five parameters within a self-directed learning environment. Methods Twenty-three medical students gathered information on the Randleman criteria. Each student was allocated 10 minutes to interact with ChatGPT-3.5, followed by 10 minutes to search the internet independently. Each ChatGPT-3.5 conversation, student summary, and internet reference were subsequently analyzed for accuracy, efficiency, and reliability. Results ChatGPT-3.5 provided the correct definition for 26.1% of students (6/23, 95% CI: 12.3% to 46.8%), while an independent internet search resulted in sources containing the correct definition for 100% of students (23/23, 95% CI: 87.5% to 100%, p = 0.0001). ChatGPT-3.5 incorrectly identified the Randleman criteria as a corneal ectasia staging system for 17.4% of students (4/23), fabricated a "Randleman syndrome" for 4.3% of students (1/23), and gave no definition for 52.2% of students (12/23). When a definition was given (47.8%, 11/23), a median of two of the five correct parameters was provided along with a median of two additional falsified parameters. Conclusion Internet search engine outperformed ChatGPT-3.5 in providing accurate and reliable information on the Randleman criteria. ChatGPT-3.5 gave false information, required excessive prompting, and propagated misunderstandings. Learners should exercise discernment when using ChatGPT-3.5. Future initiatives should evaluate the implementation of prompt engineering and updated large-language models.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11329333 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.64768 | DOI Listing |
Vestn Oftalmol
November 2024
OOO Oftalmologicheskaya klinika Spektr, Moscow, Russia.
Purpose: To determine the misclassification rate of the keratoconus percentage (KISA%) index efficacy in eyes with progressive keratoconus.
Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study of consecutive patients with confirmed progressive keratoconus and a contemporaneous normal control group with 1.00 diopters or greater regular astigmatism.
Clin Ophthalmol
May 2024
Hoopes Vision Research Center, Hoopes Vision, Draper, UT, USA.
Purpose: To determine whether the AvaGen (AG) Genetic Eye Test provided additional information for screening for the presence of keratoconus (KC) and assessing KC risk in refractive surgery candidates, as compared to the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS) and Randleman Ectasia Risk Score System (ERSS).
Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients seeking refractive surgery at an eye clinic in the United States between January 2022 and July 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed those with a family history of KC, positive KC indices, or both.
Clin Ophthalmol
December 2023
Rio de Janeiro Corneal Tomography and Biomechanics Study Group, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Purpose: To evaluate preoperative risk factors (mainly those related to corneal topography/tomography) for post-LASIK ectasia development.
Methods: A retrospective case review for post-LASIK ectasia for myopia or myopic astigmatism. The evaluated data included preoperative subjective refraction, method of flap creation, and topometric/tomographic parameters from Oculus Pentacam, including subjective curvature pattern, topometric, elevation, and pachymetric indices from the Belin Ambrosio display "BAD", and the Pentacam Random Forest Index (PRFI).
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!