ArticleCancer medicine2025
Can Large Language Models Aid Caregivers of Pediatric Cancer Patients in Information Seeking? A Cross-Sectional Investigation.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Reliability of Human Evaluation of Large Language Models in Health Care Settings: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- The Role of Emotions in Health Literacy and Patient Education: Trends, Technologies, and Future Opportunities-A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Large Language Models for Individualized Psychoeducational Tools for Psychosis: A Cross-Sectional Study.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Performance of 5 Large Language Models in Perioperative Consultation for Pediatric Hypospadias: Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Empathic AI for Patient-Centered Cancer Care: A Scoping Review of Patient Navigation, Support, and Clinical Practice.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Review
- Comprehensive Pediatric Health Risk Stratification Using an AI-Driven Framework in Children Aged 2 to 8 Years: Design and Validation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Pediatric Endocrine Tumors: Opportunities, Pitfalls, and a Roadmap for Trustworthy Clinical Translation.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Comparison of different artificial intelligence tools' answers to questions related to early intervention: ChatGPT versus Gemini.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
- Same child, different risk: demographic bias in childhood obesity attribution by large language models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Assessment of the Artificial Intelligence- Generated Fibromyalgia Information: Beyond the Hype.Archives of rheumatology · 2025Article
- Potential of ChatGPT in youth mental health emergency triage: Comparative analysis with clinicians.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Pediatric Craniofacial Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Large Language Model-Powered Conversational Agent Delivering Problem-Solving Therapy (PST) for Family Caregivers: Enhancing Empathy and Therapeutic Alliance Using In-Context Learning.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
- Exploring evaluation measures of large language models for family caregiver use: A scoping review.Digital healthReview
- Pediatric Oncology Knowledge Mobilization in Canada: A Environmental Scan.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCaregivers in pediatric oncology need accurate and understandable information about their child's condition, treatment, and side effects. This study assesses the performance of publicly accessible large language model (LLM)-supported tools in providing valuable and reliable information to caregivers of children with cancer.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, we evaluated the performance of the four LLM-supported tools-ChatGPT (GPT-4), Google Bard (Gemini Pro), Microsoft Bing Chat, and Google SGE-against a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) derived from the Children's Oncology Group Family Handbook and expert input (In total, 26 FAQs and 104 generated responses). Five pediatric oncology experts assessed the generated LLM responses using measures including accuracy, clarity, inclusivity, completeness, clinical utility, and overall rating. Additionally, the content quality was evaluated including readability, AI disclosure, source credibility, resource matching, and content originality. We used descriptive analysis and statistical tests including Shapiro-Wilk, Levene's, Kruskal-Wallis H-tests, and Dunn's post hoc tests for pairwise comparisons.
resultsChatGPT shows high overall performance when evaluated by the experts. Bard also performed well, especially in accuracy and clarity of the responses, whereas Bing Chat and Google SGE had lower overall scores. Regarding the disclosure of responses being generated by AI, it was observed less frequently in ChatGPT responses, which may have affected the clarity of responses, whereas Bard maintained a balance between AI disclosure and response clarity. Google SGE generated the most readable responses whereas ChatGPT answered with the most complexity. LLM tools varied significantly (p < 0.001) across all expert evaluations except inclusivity. Through our thematic analysis of expert free-text comments, emotional tone and empathy emerged as a unique theme with mixed feedback on expectations from AI to be empathetic.
conclusionLLM-supported tools can enhance caregivers' knowledge of pediatric oncology. Each model has unique strengths and areas for improvement, indicating the need for careful selection based on specific clinical contexts. Further research is required to explore their application in other medical specialties and patient demographics, assessing broader applicability and long-term impacts.
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.