ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2024
Assessment of Quality and Readability of Information Provided by ChatGPT in Relation to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Examining the Role of Large Language Models in Orthopedics: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Quality of AI chatbot-generated information on hypersensitivity pneumonitis for clinical and patient use.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2026Article
- Evaluating deepresearch and deepthink in total knee arthroplasty patient education: ChatGPT-4o excels in comprehensiveness, Deepseek R1 leads in clarity and readability of orthopedic information.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- ChatGPT-4 vs. DeepSeek-V3: a comparative study of response quality, reliability, usefulness, and readability for exercise and rehabilitation strategies in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- ChatGPT-5 as a leisure health advisor: multidimensional assessment of reliability, quality, usefulness and readability.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessment of quality and readability of information provided by ChatGPT in relation to developmental dysplasia of the hip and periacetabular osteotomy.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2025Article
- ChatGPT in general surgery: a cross-sectional study assessing its response to patient questions.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4 responses on physical activity guidance in children with cystic fibrosis: reliability, quality, and readability.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Refining patient education on autologous chondrocyte implantation for chondral lesions of the knee: A fine-tuned ChatGPT-4o model improves readability and quality.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Patient education strategies in pediatric orthopaedics: using ChatGPT to answer frequently asked questions on scoliosis.Spine deformity · 2025Article
- Evaluating large language models in patient education on facial plastic surgery: a standardized protocol.International journal of surgery protocols · 2025Article
- Systematic Review on Large Language Models in Orthopaedic Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- ChatGPT-Generated Responses Across Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Surgery Vary in Accuracy, Quality, and Readability: A Systematic Review.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Evaluating DeepResearch and DeepThink in anterior cruciate ligament surgery patient education: ChatGPT-4o excels in comprehensiveness, DeepSeek R1 leads in clarity and readability of orthopaedic information.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- A custom ChatGPT can accurately answer questions from an international expert osteotomy consensus statement.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Article
- An Objective Analysis of the Quality and Readability of Online Information on Breast Implant Illness.Cureus · 2025Article
- Microsoft Copilot Provides More Accurate and Reliable Information About Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury and Repair Than ChatGPT and Google Gemini; However, No Resource Was Overall the Best.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of our study was to evaluate the potential role of Artificial Intelligence tools like ChatGPT in patient education. To do this, we assessed both the quality and readability of information provided by ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 in relation to Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) injury and treatment. ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 were used to answer common patient queries relating to ACL injuries and treatment. The quality of the information was assessed using the DISCERN criteria. Readability was assessed with the use of seven readability formulae: the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level, the Flesch Reading Ease Score, the Raygor Estimate, the SMOG, the Fry, the FORCAST, and the Gunning Fog. The mean reading grade level (RGL) was compared with the recommended 8th-grade reading level, the mean RGL among adults in America. The perceived quality and mean RGL of answers given by both ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 was also compared. Both ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 yielded DISCERN scores suggesting "good" quality of information, with ChatGPT 4 slightly outperforming 3.5. However, readability levels for both versions significantly exceeded the average 8th-grade reading level for American patients. ChatGPT 3.5 had a mean RGL of 18.08, while the mean RGL of ChatGPT 4 was 17.9, exceeding the average American reading grade level by 10.08 grade levels and 9.09 grade levels, respectively. While ChatGPT can provide both reliable and good quality information on ACL injuries and treatment options, the readability of the content may limit its utility. Additionally, the consistent lack of source citation represents a significant area of concern for patients and clinicians alike. If AI is to play a role in patient education, it must reliably produce information which is accurate, easily comprehensible, and clearly sourced.
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.