Abstract
Objective
To assess the accuracy and clinical education value of responses from AI models (GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, Gemini, Gemini Advanced) compared to expert ophthalmologists’ answers to common patient questions about blepharitis, and evaluate their potential for patient education and clinical use.
Methods
Thirteen frequently asked questions about blepharitis were selected. Responses were generated by AI models and compared to expert answers. A panel of ophthalmologists rated each response for correctness and clinical education value using a 7-point Likert scale. The Friedman test with post hoc comparisons was used to identify performance differences.
Results
Expert responses had the highest correctness (6.3) and clinical education value (6.4) scores, especially in complex, context-driven questions. Significant differences were found between expert and AI responses (P < 0.05). Among AI models, GPT-3.5 performed best in simple definitions (correctness: 6.4) but dropped to 5.5 in nuanced cases. GPT-4o followed (5.4), while Gemini and Gemini Advanced scored lower (5.0 and 4.9), especially in diagnostic and treatment contexts.
Conclusions
AI models can support patient education by effectively answering basic factual questions about blepharitis. However, their limitations in complex clinical scenarios highlight the continued need for expert input. While promising as educational tools, AI should complement—not replace—clinician guidance in patient care.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
