Evaluation of the perception of information from ChatGPT in myopia education: Perspectives of students and professionals.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1111/opo.13451
Miguel Angel Sanchez Tena, Cristina Alvarez-Peregrina, Clara Martinez-Perez
{"title":"Evaluation of the perception of information from ChatGPT in myopia education: Perspectives of students and professionals.","authors":"Miguel Angel Sanchez Tena, Cristina Alvarez-Peregrina, Clara Martinez-Perez","doi":"10.1111/opo.13451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to compare the perception and understanding of the information provided by ChatGPT regarding myopia among optometry students, optometrists undertaking a Master degree and practicing optometrists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional descriptive study using a structured questionnaire distributed via Wooclap to 225 participants (125 optometry students, 21 Masters student and 79 practicing optometrists). All participants evaluated the responses generated by ChatGPT Version 4.0 using a five-point scale: very poor, poor, acceptable, good and very good. Data were analysed using SPSS, applying descriptive analysis and chi-squared tests to assess the significance of differences observed between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Practicing optometrists, with an average age of 39.7 ± 11.0 and 15.2 ± 7.5 years of professional experience, rated the information provided by ChatGPT on myopia complications more positively than the optometry and Masters student, highlighting the importance of clinical experience (p < 0.001). Alternatively, this may indicate a difference in awareness, knowledge and training, with younger students potentially being more speculative in their evaluations. The perceptions about myopia prevention among the groups were similar (p = 0.28). At the same time, the perceptions of the effectiveness of treatments such as contact lenses and pharmaceutical agents showed differences, with optometrists rating these treatments more positively (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study showed differences in the perception and interpretation of the information provided by ChatGPT about myopia depending on the level of education. While AI plays an important role in education, practicing optometrists trust the information extracted by ChatGPT more than optometry students.</p>","PeriodicalId":19522,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","volume":" ","pages":"883-894"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.13451","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the perception and understanding of the information provided by ChatGPT regarding myopia among optometry students, optometrists undertaking a Master degree and practicing optometrists.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study using a structured questionnaire distributed via Wooclap to 225 participants (125 optometry students, 21 Masters student and 79 practicing optometrists). All participants evaluated the responses generated by ChatGPT Version 4.0 using a five-point scale: very poor, poor, acceptable, good and very good. Data were analysed using SPSS, applying descriptive analysis and chi-squared tests to assess the significance of differences observed between the groups.

Results: Practicing optometrists, with an average age of 39.7 ± 11.0 and 15.2 ± 7.5 years of professional experience, rated the information provided by ChatGPT on myopia complications more positively than the optometry and Masters student, highlighting the importance of clinical experience (p < 0.001). Alternatively, this may indicate a difference in awareness, knowledge and training, with younger students potentially being more speculative in their evaluations. The perceptions about myopia prevention among the groups were similar (p = 0.28). At the same time, the perceptions of the effectiveness of treatments such as contact lenses and pharmaceutical agents showed differences, with optometrists rating these treatments more positively (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively).

Conclusions: This study showed differences in the perception and interpretation of the information provided by ChatGPT about myopia depending on the level of education. While AI plays an important role in education, practicing optometrists trust the information extracted by ChatGPT more than optometry students.

近视教育中ChatGPT信息感知的评价:学生和专业人士的视角。
目的:本研究的目的是比较验光专业学生、硕士验光师和执业验光师对ChatGPT提供的近视信息的感知和理解。方法:采用横断面描述性研究,采用结构化问卷,通过Wooclap向225名参与者(125名视光专业学生,21名硕士研究生和79名执业视光师)分发。所有参与者对ChatGPT 4.0版本生成的回答进行了评估,采用五分制:非常差、差、可接受、好和非常好。数据分析采用SPSS软件,采用描述性分析和卡方检验来评估组间差异的显著性。结果:执业验光师平均年龄分别为39.7±11.0岁和15.2±7.5岁,对ChatGPT提供的近视并发症信息的评价高于验光师和硕士生,突出了临床经验的重要性(p)。结论:本研究显示不同教育水平对ChatGPT提供的近视信息的感知和解释存在差异。虽然人工智能在教育中发挥着重要作用,但执业验光师比验光学生更信任ChatGPT提取的信息。
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
5.10
自引率
13.80%
发文量
135
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, first published in 1925, is a leading international interdisciplinary journal that addresses basic and applied questions pertinent to contemporary research in vision science and optometry. OPO publishes original research papers, technical notes, reviews and letters and will interest researchers, educators and clinicians concerned with the development, use and restoration of vision.
×
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