ArticleDigital health
Evaluation of information provided to patients by ChatGPT about chronic diseases in Spanish language.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Large Language Models and Traditional Machine Translation Tools for Translating Medical Consultation Summaries: Quantitative Pilot Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Utility of ChatGPT-4o in Creating Patient Handouts in Ophthalmology: A Comparison With American Academy of Ophthalmology Educational Materials.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- The information challenge in public health crises: a study on the reliability and readability of information provided by large language model for thunderstorm asthma.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Using Large Language Models for Chronic Disease Management Tasks: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- ChatGPT 3.5 Better Improves Comprehensibility of English, than Spanish, Generated Responses to Osteosarcoma Questions.Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Peripheral Artery Disease Education: A Battle Between ChatGPT and Google Gemini.Cureus · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-based chatbot assistance in clinical decision-making for medically complex patients in oral surgery: a comparative study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comprehensiveness of Large Language Models in Patient Queries on Gingival and Endodontic Health.International dental journal · 2025Article
- Article
- The utility of ChatGPT as a generative medical translator.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 · 2024Article
- Completeness and readability of GPT-4-generated multilingual discharge instructions in the pediatric emergency department.JAMIA open · 2024Article
- Article
- Unlocking Health Literacy: The Ultimate Guide to Hypertension Education From ChatGPT Versus Google Gemini.Cureus · 2024Article
- Evaluating ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 Responses on Hyperlipidemia for Patient Education.Cureus · 2024Article
- Advancing rheumatology with natural language processing: insights and prospects from a systematic review.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2024Review
- Thyroid Nodule Experts Evaluating ChatGPT's Assessment of Thyroid Nodules Classified by the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology.Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-facialeArticle
- Reliability and readability of Artificial Intelligence generated information on acute cholecystitis: A comparative analysis.Digital healthArticle
- Review
- Source Characteristics Influence AI-Enabled Orthopaedic Text Simplification: Recommendations for the Future.JB & JS open accessArticle
- Exploring the opportunities of large language models for summarizing palliative care consultations: A pilot comparative study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Artificial intelligence has presented exponential growth in medicine. The ChatGPT language model has been highlighted as a possible source of patient information. This study evaluates the reliability and readability of ChatGPT-generated patient information on chronic diseases in Spanish. Methods: Questions frequently asked by patients on the internet about diabetes mellitus, heart failure, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were submitted to ChatGPT. Reliability was assessed by rating responses as (1) comprehensive, (2) correct but inadequate, (3) some correct and some incorrect, (4) completely incorrect, and divided between "good" (1 and 2) and "bad" (3 and 4). Readability was evaluated with the adapted Flesch and Szigriszt formulas. Results: And 71.67% of the answers were "good," with none qualified as "completely incorrect." Better reliability was observed in questions on diabetes and RA versus heart failure (p = 0.02). In readability, responses were "moderately difficult" (54.73, interquartile range (IQR) 51.59-58.58), with better results for CKD (median 56.1, IQR 53.5-59.1) and RA (56.4, IQR 53.7-60.7), than for heart failure responses (median 50.6, IQR 46.3-53.8). Conclusion: Our study suggests that the ChatGPT tool can be a reliable source of information in spanish for patients with chronic diseases with different reliability for some of them, however, it needs to improve the readability of its answers to be recommended as a useful tool for patients.
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.