ArticleCureus2023
Pilot Testing of a Tool to Standardize the Assessment of the Quality of Health Information Generated by Artificial Intelligence-Based Models.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed.
- "MELMA" in otolaryngology: Medical evaluation of large language model answers. Clinician-rated scoring (MELMA-Q) and web-based auditing (MELMA-W) novel tools for AI assessment.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Performance of artificial intelligence chatbots in providing feeding management and oral health guidance for children with cleft lip and palate: ChatGPT 5.2 vs Gemini 3 Pro.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Guidelines vs. generative AI in CKD patient education: the role of prompt engineering and expert blinded evaluation.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Comparative diagnostic accuracy of ChatGPT large language models and expert clinicians in complex oral and maxillofacial diseases.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating Chinese large language models for HIV/AIDS health information: a multidimensional comparative study of response quality.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Evaluating large language models using the Type 2 Diabetes Health Education guideline: a comparative analysis of ChatGPT-4.1, Claude-4.0, DeepSeek-V3, and ERNIE Bot 4.5 Turbo.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessing the suitability of ChatGPT in responding to public inquiries about dental crown restorations.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparison of ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 in the Management of Ophthalmological Emergencies-An Analysis of Ten Fictional Case Vignettes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- The application and challenges of ChatGPT in laboratory medicine.Advances in laboratory medicine · 2025Review
- Human evaluation of large language models in healthcare: gaps, challenges, and the need for standardization.npj health systems · 2025Article
- Assessing ChatGPT's suitability in responding to the public's inquires on the effects of smoking on oral health.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Review
- Evaluating Quality and Readability of AI-generated Information on Living Kidney Donation.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- Article
- Accuracy and consistency of publicly available Large Language Models as clinical decision support tools for the management of colon cancer.Journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- A framework for human evaluation of large language models in healthcare derived from literature review.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Online Patient Education in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: ChatGPT versus Google Search.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
Background Artificial intelligence (AI)-based conversational models, such as Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT), Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard, have emerged as valuable sources of health information for lay individuals. However, the accuracy of the information provided by these AI models remains a significant concern. This pilot study aimed to test a new tool with key themes for inclusion as follows:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.