ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2025
Evaluating the quality and readability of ChatGPT-generated patient-facing medical information in rhinology.
Article in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The potential of large language models in the field of infertility: a systematic review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Comment on "Customized Education Sheets Generated by ChatGPT Improve Parental Visit Satisfaction and Procedural Knowledge Prior to Pediatric Cardiac Catheterization".Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Comment on 'Evaluating the efficacy and readability of advanced large language models in responding to patients' frequently asked questions about chronic rhinosinusitis: a comparative analysis'.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
- AI chatbots for health information seeking among Chinese patients with precancerous ENT lesions: a descriptive qualitative study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Comment on 'comparative analysis of artificial intelligence platforms in generating post-operative instructions for endoscopic transnasal skull base surgery'.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
- Comment on: "Evaluation of artificial intelligence use in ankylosing spondylitis with chatgpt-4: patient and physician perspectives".Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Comment on "Expert evaluation of GPT-4o and Gemini responses to patient questions on carotid endarterectomy".Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
- Comment on "Examining the effectiveness of ChatGPT responses to frequently asked questions by individuals with postural disorders".Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Models for Dysphonia Patient Education.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- The Application and Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Rhinology: A Review.Cureus · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot ChatGPT has become a major tool for generating responses in healthcare. This study assessed ChatGPT's ability to generate French preoperative patient-facing medical information (PFI) in rhinology at a comparable level to material provided by an academic source, the French Society of Otorhinolaryngology (Société Française d'Otorhinolaryngologie et Chirurgie Cervico-Faciale, SFORL).
methodsChatGPT and SFORL French preoperative PFI in rhinology were compared by analyzing responses to 16 questions regarding common rhinology procedures: ethmoidectomy, sphenoidotomy, septoplasty, and endonasal dacryocystorhinostomy. Twenty rhinologists assessed the clarity, comprehensiveness, accuracy, and overall quality of the information, while 24 nonmedical individuals analyzed the clarity and overall quality. Six readability formulas were used to compare readability scores.
resultsAmong rhinologists, no significant difference was found between ChatGPT and SFORL regarding clarity (7.61 ± 0.36 vs. 7.53 ± 0.28; p = 0.485), comprehensiveness (7.32 ± 0.77 vs. 7.58 ± 0.50; p = 0.872), and accuracy (inaccuracies: 60% vs. 40%; p = 0.228), respectively. Non-medical individuals scored the clarity of ChatGPT significantly higher than that of the SFORL (8.16 ± 1.16 vs. 6.32 ± 1.33; p < 0.0001). The non-medical individuals chose ChatGPT as the most informative source significantly more often than rhinologists (62.8% vs. 39.7%, p < 0.001).
conclusionChatGPT-generated French preoperative PFI in rhinology was comparable to SFORL-provided PFI regarding clarity, comprehensiveness, accuracy, readability, and overall quality. This study highlights ChatGPT's potential to increase accessibility to high quality PFI and suggests its use by physicians as a complement to academic resources written by learned societies such as the SFORL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39724239What 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.