Research Appraisals
Evidence-based critical appraisals of the latest medical research, systematically evaluated using Oxford CEBM methodology.
Showing 2 appraisals
Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie
Comparing the performance of four mainstream large language models on medical literature review generation: a human expert evaluation in SMILE surgery
PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate and compare the performance of four leading large language models (LLMs) in generating medical literature reviews across topics of varying research maturity, thereby providing insights for their effective and responsible application in academic writing. METHODS: In this comparative study, using standardized prompts, we instructed four leading LLMs (GPT-4, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Grok-3, and DeepSeek R1) to generate literature reviews on nine topics related to small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) surgery. These topics were categorized into three groups by research maturity: well-researched, controversial, and open. Seven ophthalmology experts evaluated the generated content across four dimensions: quality, accuracy, bias, and relevance, while all references were verified for authenticity. Performance differences among models were evaluated using group comparison tests followed by post-hoc analysis. RESULTS: Significant performance variations were identified across all four models and dimensions (p < 0.001). Specifically, Gemini ranked highest in content quality, accuracy, and bias control. In contrast, DeepSeek, despite its high-quality score, received the lowest relevance score. Grok-3 demonstrated the highest reference authenticity (p < 0.001), whereas GPT-4's was the lowest (p < 0.001). All models showed diminished performance on open topics and exhibited severe reference fabrication ("hallucinations"). CONCLUSION: Rather than excelling universally, LLMs exhibit distinct and task-specific strengths that mandate a task-driven, hybrid strategy in tool selection. Reference fabrication was found to be a pervasive issue across all models, regardless of the task topic, elevating human verification from a best practice to an essential safeguard for academic integrity.
9 May 2026
Read appraisal →International ophthalmology
Topical ROCK inhibition accelerates recovery after Descemetorhexis Without Endothelial Keratoplasty (DWEK) in Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy: a prospective comparative clinical trial
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical efficacy and recovery kinetics of Descemetorhexis Without Endothelial Keratoplasty (DWEK) performed with and without adjunctive topical ripasudil 0.4% in eyes with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD). SETTING: Cornea and Refractive Surgery Services, Guru Nanak Eye Centre, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, interventional, comparative clinical study. METHODS: Twenty-four eyes with mild-to-moderate FECD underwent phacoemulsification with a standardized 4-mm central DWEK and were randomized to DWEK-alone (Group A) or DWEK + topical ripasudil 0.4% four times daily for eight weeks (Group B). Primary outcomes were changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, logMAR), central corneal thickness (CCT), and peripheral endothelial cell density (ECD) over 6 months. Secondary outcomes were time to corneal clearing, optical quality (higher-order aberrations), and complications. RESULTS: BCVA improved significantly in both groups, with faster recovery in Group B (0.24 ± 0.11 vs. 0.36 ± 0.14 logMAR at 6 months; p < 0.05). CCT decreased more rapidly in Group B (572.1 ± 27.5 µm vs. 590.2 ± 29.8 µm; p = 0.04). Peripheral ECD remained stable in Group A but showed a mild gain in Group B (p = 0.04). Group B achieved earlier corneal deturgescence (mean 8 ± 2 weeks vs. 12 ± 3 weeks). No eye in either group developed persistent edema, interface haze, or required rescue keratoplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive topical ripasudil after DWEK accelerates endothelial recovery, corneal deturgescence, and visual rehabilitation compared with DWEK alone, without compromising safety.
25 Apr 2026
Read appraisal →