ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024
ChatGPT and Google Assistant as a Source of Patient Education for Patients With Amblyopia: Content Analysis.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating Large Language Models in Ophthalmology: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Applications of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Strabismus Surgery Video-Based Education.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Large Language Model-Generated Patient Education Materials in Pediatric Ophthalmology: A Scoping Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Article
- Efficacy of Dichoptic Treatment vs Eye Patching in Pediatric Patients with Amblyopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe queried ChatGPT (OpenAI) and Google Assistant about amblyopia and compared their answers with the keywords found on the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) website, specifically the section on amblyopia. Out of the 26 keywords chosen from the website, ChatGPT included 11 (42%) in its responses, while Google included 8 (31%).
objectiveOur study investigated the adherence of ChatGPT-3.5 and Google Assistant to the guidelines of the AAPOS for patient education on amblyopia.
methodsChatGPT-3.5 was used. The four questions taken from the AAPOS website, specifically its glossary section for amblyopia, are as follows: (1) What is amblyopia? (2) What causes amblyopia? (3) How is amblyopia treated? (4) What happens if amblyopia is untreated? Approved and selected by ophthalmologists (GW and DL), the keywords from AAPOS were words or phrases that deemed significant for the education of patients with amblyopia. The "Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level" formula, approved by the US Department of Education, was used to evaluate the reading comprehension level for the responses from ChatGPT, Google Assistant, and AAPOS.
resultsIn their responses, ChatGPT did not mention the term "ophthalmologist," whereas Google Assistant and AAPOS both mentioned the term once and twice, respectively. ChatGPT did, however, use the term "eye doctors" once. According to the Flesch-Kincaid test, the average reading level of AAPOS was 11.4 (SD 2.1; the lowest level) while that of Google was 13.1 (SD 4.8; the highest required reading level), also showing the greatest variation in grade level in its responses. ChatGPT's answers, on average, scored 12.4 (SD 1.1) grade level. They were all similar in terms of difficulty level in reading. For the keywords, out of the 4 responses, ChatGPT used 42% (11/26) of the keywords, whereas Google Assistant used 31% (8/26).
conclusionsChatGPT trains on texts and phrases and generates new sentences, while Google Assistant automatically copies website links. As ophthalmologists, we should consider including "see an ophthalmologist" on our websites and journals. While ChatGPT is here to stay, we, as physicians, need to monitor its answers.
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.