Comparative performance of large language models in answering cornea and cataract surgery questions for resident training

The application of large language models (LLMs) in the medical field has gained increasing popularity; however, their effectiveness in ophthalmology remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of responses generated by various deep learning-based LLMs to questions on cataract and corneal diseases and surgeries, and to verify their educational effectiveness by comparing the performances of LLMs with those provided by ophthalmology fellows and residents. Eighty-one multiple-choice questions on corneal diseases and cataract surgeries were developed based on the standard format of the Korean ophthalmology board examination and categorized into three subtypes: recall-type (n = 27), interpretation-type (n = 27), and problem-solving-type (n = 27). The accuracy and appropriateness of commonly used LLMs (ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-5, Gemini 3.0 Pro, and Claude Sonnet 4.5) were evaluated and compared with one another, and against the performances of three ophthalmology residents and three corneal fellows. Among the four LLMs, ChatGPT-5 demonstrated the highest overall accuracy (75/81; 92.59%), followed by Gemini 3.0 Pro (73/81; 90.12%) and Claude Sonnet 4.5 (73/81; 90.12%), all of which outperformed ChatGPT-4o (70/81; 86.42%) as well as ophthalmology fellows (86.42 ± 1.23%) and residents (82.30 ± 8.22%). For recall-type questions, ChatGPT-5 achieved the highest accuracy (92.59%), and the other three LLMs (85.19%) outperformed both fellows (82.72 ± 4.28%) and residents (71.60 ± 17.50%). In interpretation-type questions, ChatGPT-5, Gemini 3.0 Pro, and Claude Sonnet 4.5 achieved perfect scores (100%), while ChatGPT-4o (92.59%) performed comparably to fellows (92.59 ± 7.41%) and better than residents (87.65 ± 4.28%). However, in problem-solving-type questions, all LLMs scored relatively lower (ChatGPT-5: 85.19%; others: 81.48%) than the mean performance of fellows (87.65 ± 11.91%). Among the LLMs, ChatGPT-5 demonstrated the highest overall performance; however, no statistically significant differences were observed between the models. Compared with ophthalmology trainees, ChatGPT-5, Gemini 3.0 Pro, and Claude Sonnet 4.5 achieved significantly higher overall scores than the mean trainee performance. Although LLMs showed good performance in recall- and interpretation-type questions, their relatively lower accuracy in problem-solving-type questions suggests that further advances in LLMs are necessary for their reliable use as educational tools in ophthalmology.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Ophthalmology
Published
2026-03-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-026-04767-z
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative performance of large language models in answering cornea and cataract surgery questions for resident training

Chung Young Kim, Gahye Lee, Minjung Kim, Young In Yun et al.
BMC Ophthalmology
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Comparative performance of large language models in answering cornea and cataract surgery questions for resident training

Chung Young Kim, Gahye Lee, Minjung Kim, Young In Yun, Chang Ho Yoon, Seonghwan Kim, Man Ji
article en

Abstract

The application of large language models (LLMs) in the medical field has gained increasing popularity; however, their effectiveness in ophthalmology remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of responses generated by various deep learning-based LLMs to questions on cataract and corneal diseases and surgeries, and to verify their educational effectiveness by comparing the performances of LLMs with those provided by ophthalmology fellows and residents. Eighty-one multiple-choice questions on corneal diseases and cataract surgeries were developed based on the standard format of the Korean ophthalmology board examination and categorized into three subtypes: recall-type (n = 27), interpretation-type (n = 27), and problem-solving-type (n = 27). The accuracy and appropriateness of commonly used LLMs (ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-5, Gemini 3.0 Pro, and Claude Sonnet 4.5) were evaluated and compared with one another, and against the performances of three ophthalmology residents and three corneal fellows. Among the four LLMs, ChatGPT-5 demonstrated the highest overall accuracy (75/81; 92.59%), followed by Gemini 3.0 Pro (73/81; 90.12%) and Claude Sonnet 4.5 (73/81; 90.12%), all of which outperformed ChatGPT-4o (70/81; 86.42%) as well as ophthalmology fellows (86.42 ± 1.23%) and residents (82.30 ± 8.22%). For recall-type questions, ChatGPT-5 achieved the highest accuracy (92.59%), and the other three LLMs (85.19%) outperformed both fellows (82.72 ± 4.28%) and residents (71.60 ± 17.50%). In interpretation-type questions, ChatGPT-5, Gemini 3.0 Pro, and Claude Sonnet 4.5 achieved perfect scores (100%), while ChatGPT-4o (92.59%) performed comparably to fellows (92.59 ± 7.41%) and better than residents (87.65 ± 4.28%). However, in problem-solving-type questions, all LLMs scored relatively lower (ChatGPT-5: 85.19%; others: 81.48%) than the mean performance of fellows (87.65 ± 11.91%). Among the LLMs, ChatGPT-5 demonstrated the highest overall performance; however, no statistically significant differences were observed between the models. Compared with ophthalmology trainees, ChatGPT-5, Gemini 3.0 Pro, and Claude Sonnet 4.5 achieved significantly higher overall scores than the mean trainee performance. Although LLMs showed good performance in recall- and interpretation-type questions, their relatively lower accuracy in problem-solving-type questions suggests that further advances in LLMs are necessary for their reliable use as educational tools in ophthalmology.

BMC Ophthalmology
Seoul National University (KR), Seoul Metropolitan Government (KR), Seoul National University Hospital (KR), SNUH SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center (KR), Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital (KR), National University College (PR)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.