ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2025
Does ChatGPT help patients access reliable and comprehensive information about psoriasis?
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating the quality of artificial intelligence responses to psoriasis-related clinical and patient questions: a comparative study of ChatGPT, Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rapid advances in artificial intelligence have affected medical knowledge and practices. However, it is unclear whether ChatGPT positively guides patients on their health by providing accurate information. Since psoriasis lasts a lifetime and has no cure, patients commonly seek information and treatment. We evaluated ChatGPT's answers to questions on psoriasis. Methods: Based on our clinical experience, we have identified the most common questions that psoriasis patients ask us about psoriasis. The reliability of responses provided by ChatGPT was rated from 1, very poor, to 5, very good. The comprehensiveness of the responses was rated from 1, incomplete, to 3, comprehensive. Results: The reliability was scored as 5 for responses to 11 out of 12 questions and 4 for 1 question. Author 1 rated the responses to 8 of the 12 questions as comprehensive (3) and 4 as adequate (2). Author 2 rated the response to 1 question as adequate (2) and the remaining responses as comprehensive (3). Conclusion: Our results reveal that ChatGPT can provide patients with reliable and comprehensive information about psoriasis. As ChatGPT is widely used, it can be a helpful source of information that psoriasis patients can access quickly and easily and that can guide them correctly.
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.