Accuracy, readability, and bias of GPT-4o mini responses to oculoplastic patient questions.

Henry T, Staes G, Russell A, Richards-Walker NQ

DOI: 10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017
Published: 2026
Container: Frontiers in ophthalmology
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: yes

Credibility signals

limited evidence Score 45/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017,
  title = {Accuracy, readability, and bias of GPT-4o mini responses to oculoplastic patient questions.},
  author = {Henry T and Staes G and Russell A and Richards-Walker NQ},
  year = {2026},
  journal = {Frontiers in ophthalmology},
  doi = {10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Accuracy, readability, and bias of GPT-4o mini responses to oculoplastic patient questions.
AU  - Henry T
AU  - Staes G
AU  - Russell A
AU  - Richards-Walker NQ
PY  - 2026
JO  - Frontiers in ophthalmology
DO  - 10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017
UR  - https://doi.org/10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017
ER  -

APA

T, H., G, S., A, R., & NQ, R. (2026). Accuracy, readability, and bias of GPT-4o mini responses to oculoplastic patient questions.. Frontiers in ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fopht.2026.1718017

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-11-10T12:25:03.490Z