Accuracy of a Large Language Model as a new tool for optometry education.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Clinical and Experimental Optometry Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-03 DOI:10.1080/08164622.2023.2288174
Genis Cardona, Marc Argiles, Lluis Pérez-Mañá
{"title":"Accuracy of a Large Language Model as a new tool for optometry education.","authors":"Genis Cardona, Marc Argiles, Lluis Pérez-Mañá","doi":"10.1080/08164622.2023.2288174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The unsupervised introduction of certain Artificial Intelligence tools in optometry education may challenge the proper acquisition of accurate clinical knowledge and skills proficiency.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Large Language Models like ChatGPT (Generative Pretrained Transformer) are increasingly being used by researchers and students for work and academic assignments. The authoritative and conversationally correct language provided by these tools may mask their inherent limitations when presented with specific scientific and clinical queries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three sets of 10 queries related to contact lenses & anterior eye, low vision and binocular vision & vision therapy were presented to ChatGPT, with instructions to provide five relevant references to support each response. Three experts and 53 undergraduate and post-graduate students graded from 0 to 10 the accuracy of the responses, and the references were evaluated for precision and relevance. Students graded from 0 to 10 the potential usefulness of ChatGPT for their academic coursework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median scores were 7, 8 and 6 (experts) and 8, 9 and 7.5 (students) for the contact lenses & anterior eye, low vision and binocular vision & vision therapy categories, respectively. Responses to more specific queries were awarded lower scores by both experts (ρ = -0.612; <i>P</i> < 0.001) and students (ρ = -0.578; <i>P</i> = 0.001). Of 150 references, 24% were accurate and 19.3% relevant. Students graded the usefulness of ChatGPT with 7.5 (2 to 9), 7 (3 to 9) and 8.5 (3 to 10) for contact lenses & anterior eye, low vision and binocular vision & vision therapy, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Careful expert appraisal of the responses and, particularly, of the references provided by ChatGPT is required in research and academic settings. As the use of these tools becomes widespread, it is essential to take proactive steps to address their limitations and ensure their responsible use.</p>","PeriodicalId":10214,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Optometry","volume":" ","pages":"343-346"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Optometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08164622.2023.2288174","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Clinical relevance: The unsupervised introduction of certain Artificial Intelligence tools in optometry education may challenge the proper acquisition of accurate clinical knowledge and skills proficiency.

Background: Large Language Models like ChatGPT (Generative Pretrained Transformer) are increasingly being used by researchers and students for work and academic assignments. The authoritative and conversationally correct language provided by these tools may mask their inherent limitations when presented with specific scientific and clinical queries.

Methods: Three sets of 10 queries related to contact lenses & anterior eye, low vision and binocular vision & vision therapy were presented to ChatGPT, with instructions to provide five relevant references to support each response. Three experts and 53 undergraduate and post-graduate students graded from 0 to 10 the accuracy of the responses, and the references were evaluated for precision and relevance. Students graded from 0 to 10 the potential usefulness of ChatGPT for their academic coursework.

Results: Median scores were 7, 8 and 6 (experts) and 8, 9 and 7.5 (students) for the contact lenses & anterior eye, low vision and binocular vision & vision therapy categories, respectively. Responses to more specific queries were awarded lower scores by both experts (ρ = -0.612; P < 0.001) and students (ρ = -0.578; P = 0.001). Of 150 references, 24% were accurate and 19.3% relevant. Students graded the usefulness of ChatGPT with 7.5 (2 to 9), 7 (3 to 9) and 8.5 (3 to 10) for contact lenses & anterior eye, low vision and binocular vision & vision therapy, respectively.

Conclusion: Careful expert appraisal of the responses and, particularly, of the references provided by ChatGPT is required in research and academic settings. As the use of these tools becomes widespread, it is essential to take proactive steps to address their limitations and ensure their responsible use.

大型语言模型作为视光教育新工具的准确性。
临床相关性:在验光教育中无监督地引入某些人工智能工具可能会挑战正确获得准确的临床知识和技能熟练程度。背景:像ChatGPT(生成式预训练转换器)这样的大型语言模型越来越多地被研究人员和学生用于工作和学术作业。这些工具提供的权威和会话正确的语言可能掩盖了它们在面对特定科学和临床问题时的固有局限性。方法:向ChatGPT提交隐形眼镜与前眼、低视力和双眼视力与视力治疗相关的3组10个问题,并提供5个相关参考文献来支持每个回答。三位专家和53名本科生和研究生对回答的准确性进行了0到10分的评分,并对参考文献的准确性和相关性进行了评估。学生们对ChatGPT在学术课程中的潜在用处进行了从0到10的评分。结果:隐形眼镜及前眼、低视力、双眼视力及视力治疗类别的中位分分别为7分、8分和6分、8分和7.5分(学生)。对于更具体的问题,两位专家给出的回答得分较低(ρ = -0.612;p = 0.001)。150篇文献中,准确率为24%,相关性为19.3%。对于隐形眼镜和前眼、低视力和双眼视力和视力治疗,学生们分别给ChatGPT的有用性打了7.5分(2到9分)、7分(3到9分)和8.5分(3到10分)。结论:在研究和学术环境中,需要对回复进行仔细的专家评估,特别是对ChatGPT提供的参考资料进行评估。随着这些工具的广泛使用,必须采取积极措施解决其局限性,并确保负责任地使用这些工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Experimental Optometry is a peer reviewed journal listed by ISI and abstracted by PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Citation Index and Current Contents. It publishes original research papers and reviews in clinical optometry and vision science. Debate and discussion of controversial scientific and clinical issues is encouraged and letters to the Editor and short communications expressing points of view on matters within the Journal''s areas of interest are welcome. The Journal is published six times annually.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信