ArticleCureus2025
Analysis of Patient Education Guides Generated by ChatGPT and Gemini on Common Anti-diabetic Drugs: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Assessing the information quality of AI-generated patient educational materials for diabetes: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Generative AI for the Creation of Patient Education Materials on Coronary Heart Disease: A Comparative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Article
- Evaluating AI-Generated Patient Education Guides: A Comparative Study of ChatGPT and Deepseek.Cureus · 2025Article
- Quality evaluation of AI-generated diabetes-related health education texts from different generative models.Digital healthArticle
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
Introduction Patient information guides are required, as they help to identify early diseases and complications and to prevent them. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being used to create patient education guides for easy accessibility to people. Methodology This was a cross-sectional study analyzing patient information guides regarding six anti-diabetic drugs created using ChatGPT (OpenAI, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States) and Gemini (Google LLC, Mountain View, California, United States), respectively. The patient information guides were on anti-diabetic drugs, including metformin, empagliflozin, liraglutide, glipizide, sitagliptin, and insulin glargine, and were created with the help of various prompts. Results There was no statistically significant difference found between any of the characteristics of the responses generated by the two AI tools, according to the P values obtained. Conclusion On comparing the two AI tools, there was not much difference noted in readability, reliability, and similarity.
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.