ReviewFrontiers in medicine2025
Making Chatbots more human: deep reasoning large language models in ophthalmology.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in deep-reasoning large language models (LLMs)-including OpenAI's GPT series and open-source DeepSeek models-have expanded their potential applications in ophthalmology. In ophthalmology, image interpretation continues to rely primarily on conventional computer vision and vision language model pipelines, whereas text-based LLMs contribute to language-centric workflows, such as report interpretation, patient education drafting, and electronic health record (EHR) summarization. Multimodal systems that integrate visual inputs with reasoning have been explored in simulated or retrospective settings for tasks such as personalized planning. Although these approaches may enhance workflow efficiency and decision-making, their direct clinical benefits have not yet been established. Nevertheless, practical implementation remains challenging because of computational demands, privacy and bias considerations, and persistent issues with transparency and interpretability. Additionally, system congestion and inconsistent response times further complicate real-world clinical use. Therefore, future research should focus on addressing operational and ethical constraints, tailoring AI systems to ophthalmic workflows, and ensuring that such tools remain an assistive, equitable, and transparent partner in clinical decision-making. Thoughtful integration of deep reasoning models appears promising for ophthalmic practice, but prospective interventional studies are required before making any claims regarding patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.