Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39967059›Full record

ArticleBJU international2025

Evaluating interactions of patients with large language models for medical information.

Nicolas Carl, Sarah Haggenmüller, Christoph Wies, Lisa Nguyen, Jana Theres Winterstein, Martin Joachim Hetz, Maurin Helen Mangold, Friedrich Otto Hartung, Britta Grüne, Tim Holland-Letz and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Nicolas CarlDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0080-3455
Sarah HaggenmüllerDivision of Digital Prevention, Diagnostics and Therapy Guidance, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Christoph WiesMedical Faculty, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Lisa NguyenMedical Faculty Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Jana Theres WintersteinMedical Faculty, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Martin Joachim HetzDivision of Digital Prevention, Diagnostics and Therapy Guidance, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Maurin Helen MangoldDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Friedrich Otto HartungDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Britta GrüneDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Tim Holland-LetzDepartment of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Maurice Stephan MichelDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Titus Josef BrinkerDivision of Digital Prevention, Diagnostics and Therapy Guidance, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Frederik WesselsDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4213-8692

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore the interaction of real-world patients with a chatbot in a clinical setting, investigating key aspects of medical information provided by large language models (LLMs). PATIENTS AND

methodsThe study enrolled 300 patients seeking urological counselling between February and July 2024. First, participants voluntarily conversed with a Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) powered chatbot to ask questions related to their medical situation. In the following survey, patients rated the perceived utility, completeness, and understandability of the information provided during the simulated conversation as well as user-friendliness. Finally, patients were asked which, in their experience, best answered their questions: LLMs, urologists, or search engines.

resultsA total of 292 patients completed the study. The majority of patients perceived the chatbot as providing useful, complete, and understandable information, as well as being user-friendly. However, the ability of human urologists to answer medical questions in an understandable way was rated higher than of LLMs. Interestingly, 53% of participants rated the question-answering ability of LLMs higher than search engines. Age was not associated with preferences. Limitations include social desirability and sampling biases. DISCUSSION: This study highlights the potential of LLMs to enhance patient education and communication in clinical settings, with patients valuing their user-friendliness and comprehensiveness for medical information. By addressing preliminary questions, LLMs could potentially relieve time constraints on healthcare providers, enabling medical personnel to focus on complex inquiries and patient care.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAgedFemaleHumansLarge Language ModelsMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultartificial intelligenceclinical trialimplementation sciencelarge language modelspatient interaction

Identifiers

PMID39967059
PMCPMC12053131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.