This analysis compares professionalism and readability in AI chatbots versus ASA materials for hysterectomy education.
This study compared professionalism, readability, and patient education quality between artificial intelligence (AI)-generated responses (ChatGPT and Gemini) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) website for 8 frequently asked questions. To compare the differences in professionalism, readability, and patient education quality between AI (ChatGPT and Gemini) and the ASA website when answering 8 common hysterectomy questions, and to assess whether AI-generated content can serve as a reliable source of patient education for hysterectomy. Blinded experts evaluated professionalism, while 6 readability indices and the patient education materials assessment tool were used to assess content quality. Statistical comparisons were performed with P <.05 considered significant. ChatGPT and Gemini demonstrated significantly higher professionalism scores than the ASA website (P <.05); however, their readability was lower (P <.05). There were no significant differences in professionalism or readability between the ChatGPT and Gemini (P >.05). Although AI responses align with clinical guidelines, their low readability poses a usability concern. AI-driven content provides professional and accurate patient education on hysterectomy. However, further refinements are required to improve accessibility without compromising quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: