rhinoplasty.cc
Menu

Journal archive · 2025

FPSAM Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine · 2025

Comparative Performance of the Leading Large Language Models in Answering Complex Rhinoplasty Consultation Questions

Goshtasbi K, Best C, Powers B, Ching H, Pastorek NJ, Altman D, Adamson P, Krugman M, Wong BJF.

What this paper says

Seven rhinoplasty surgeons ranked answers from four language models to ten consultation questions, placing Claude first with 224 points, ahead of ChatGPT at 200 and Meta and Gemini at 138 each.

Overview

Several language models can produce medical discussion at a human level, but they had not been compared on rhinoplasty knowledge. The authors put ten open ended rhinoplasty consultation questions to ChatGPT-4o, Google Gemini, Claude and Meta-AI. Responses were randomized and ranked by seven plastic surgeons specializing in rhinoplasty, from 1 for worst to 4 for best, and readability was scored separately.

Sections of note

  • Design: blinded comparative ranking of four language models by seven expert surgeons.
  • Ten open ended rhinoplasty consultation questions were used.
  • Claude gave the top answer for seven questions; ChatGPT for three.
  • Collective scores: Claude 224, ChatGPT 200, Meta 138, Gemini 138.
  • Claude's mean score per question was 3.20, significantly outperforming all other models, p less than 0.05.
  • ChatGPT's mean was 2.86, outperforming Meta and Gemini, which performed similarly to each other.
  • Readability was assessed with Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade scores.
  • Meta had a significantly lower Flesch-Kincaid grade than Claude and ChatGPT, and a lower Flesch Reading Ease than ChatGPT.

What it means for a patient

  • The models differ substantially in quality on the same questions, so which tool a person uses affects the information they get.
  • The model rated best for content was not the easiest to read, and the model with the simplest text ranked lowest for quality.
  • Ratings came from surgeons judging quality, not from patients judging usefulness.
  • Limits: ten questions, seven raters, one point in time for models that change frequently, and no comparison against information from a surgeon.

Why this paper matters

People consult these tools before booking a consultation, and until now there was no comparison of which handles rhinoplasty questions well. Ranking them by blinded expert judgment establishes a baseline. The rankings date quickly as models are updated, and the study does not assess whether any answer is safe to act on.

Terms

  • Large language model: software trained on text that generates human like written responses.
  • Open-ended question: a question that cannot be answered yes or no.
  • Flesch Reading Ease: a score estimating how easy a text is to read, higher being easier.
  • Flesch-Kincaid Grade: an estimate of the school grade level needed to understand a text.
  • Blinded ranking: rating by evaluators who do not know the source of what they rate.

Summary written by rhinoplasty.cc from the abstract, 2026-09-09; not medical advice. The authors' own abstract follows.

From the abstract

“Various large language models (LLMs) can provide human-level medical discussions, but they have not been compared regarding rhinoplasty knowledge. Objective: To compare the leading LLMs in answering complex rhinoplasty consultation questions as evaluated by plastic surgeons. Methods: Ten open-ended rhinoplasty…”

Excerpt; the full abstract is on PubMed.

Citation

PubMed
Journal
Facial Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine
Year
2025
Authors
9
Type
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Access
Subscription
On this site
Summary and abstract

Authors on this site

Start here

This paper sits outside the 16 topic groups; the archive holds every paper by journal and year.

Related papers

Same journal, 2025.

  1. FPSAM
    3D Smartphone Photography During Rhinoplasty Surgery
    Youssefi I, Obermeyer IP, Kim S et al.
    2025PMID 39463383Full text
  2. FPSAM
    2025PMID 38621185
  3. FPSAM
    2025PMID 40139802Summary
  4. FPSAM
    2025PMID 39142701Summary
  5. FPSAM
    2025PMID 40147429Summary
  6. FPSAM
    2025PMID 39505713Summary
  7. FPSAM
    2025PMID 39836149Summary
  8. FPSAM
    2025PMID 39718300