Large language models and their impact in ophthalmology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The advent of generative artificial intelligence and large language models has ushered in transformative applications within medicine. Specifically in ophthalmology, large language models offer unique opportunities to revolutionise digital eye care, address clinical workflow inefficiencies, and enhance patient experiences across diverse global eye care landscapes. Yet alongside these prospects lie tangible and ethical challenges, encompassing data privacy, security, and the intricacies of embedding large language models into clinical routines. This Viewpoint highlights the promising applications of large language models in ophthalmology, while weighing up the practical and ethical barriers towards their real-world implementation. This Viewpoint seeks to stimulate broader discourse on the potential of large language models in ophthalmology and to galvanise both clinicians and researchers into tackling the prevailing challenges and optimising the benefits of large language models while curtailing the associated risks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it