ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2026
Assessing the Usability of ChatGPT Responses Compared to Other Online Information in Hand Surgery.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Use of Large Language Models in Improving the Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Peripheral Nerve Surgery.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A systematic review of the limitations of large language models in generating healthcare content.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChatGPT is a natural language processing tool with potential to increase accessibility of health information. This study aimed to: (1) assess usability of online medical information for hand surgery topics; and (2) evaluate the influence of medical consensus.
methodsThree phrases were posed 20 times each to Google, ChatGPT-3.5, and ChatGPT-4.0: "What is the cause of carpal tunnel syndrome?" (high consensus), "What is the cause of tennis elbow?" (moderate consensus), and "Platelet-rich plasma for thumb arthritis?" (low consensus). Readability was assessed by grade level while reliability and accuracy were scored based on predetermined rubrics. Scores were compared via Mann-Whitney
resultsGoogle responses had superior readability for moderate-high consensus topics (
conclusionsCompared to Google, ChatGPT does not provide readable responses when providing reliable medical information. While patients can modulate ChatGPT readability with prompt engineering, this requires insight into their health literacy and is an additional barrier to accessing medical information. Medical consensus influences usability of online medical information for both Google and ChatGPT. Providers should remain aware of ChatGPT limitations in distributing medical information.
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.