ArticleJournal of pediatric surgery2025
Designing Patient-Centered Communication Aids in Pediatric Surgery Using Large Language Models.
Article in Journal of pediatric surgery, 2025. 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.
- Attitudes Toward Large Language Models in Health Care and Preferences for Their Adoption and Oversight Among Health Care Professionals: Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Are artificial intelligence systems ready for pediatric surgical decision-making? A comparative evaluation of large language models versus pediatric surgeons.Pediatric surgery international · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLarge language models (LLMs) have been shown to translate information from highly specific domains into lay-digestible terms. Pediatric surgery remains an area in which it is difficult to communicate clinical information in an age-appropriate manner, given the vast diversity in language comprehension levels across patient populations and the complexity of procedures performed. This study evaluates LLMs as tools for generating explanations of common pediatric surgeries to increase efficiency and quality of communication.
methodsTwo generalist LLMs (GPT-4-turbo [OpenAI] and Gemini 1.0 Pro [Google]; accessed March 2024) were provided the following prompt: "Act as a pediatric surgeon and explain a [PROCEDURE] to a [AGE] old [GENDER] in age-appropriate language. Discuss indications for the procedure, steps of the procedure, possible complications, and post-operative recovery." Responses were generated for 4 common pediatric surgeries (appendectomy, umbilical hernia repair, cholecystectomy, and gastrostomy tube placement) for male and female children of ages 5, 8, 10, 13, and 16 years. Forty responses from each LLM were rated for accuracy, completeness, age-appropriateness, possibility of demographic bias, and overall quality by two pediatricians and two general surgeons using a five-point Likert scale. Numeric ratings were summarized as means and 95 % confidence intervals. An ordinal mixed-effects model with rater as a random effect was used to account for clustering by rater. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsResponses from GPT-4-turbo and Gemini 1.0 Pro models were both rated with moderately high overall quality (GPT4: 3.97 [3.82, 4.12]; Gemini 1.0 Pro: 3.39 [3.20, 3.57]) and moderately low possibility of demographic bias (GPT4: 2.49 [2.38, 2.60]; Gemini 1.0 Pro: 2.93 [2.79, 3.07]). GPT-4-turbo responses were rated as highly accurate (4.18 [4.05, 4.32]), highly complete (4.21 [4.10, 4.33]), and highly age-appropriate (4.10 [3.96, 4.24]), while Gemini 1.0 Pro responses were rated as moderately accurate (3.83 [3.70, 3.96]), moderately complete (3.95 [3.83, 4.07]) and moderately age-appropriate (3.63 [3.47, 3.79]). With GPT-4-turbo, ratings on most measures tend to improve as patient age increases, whereas with Gemini 1.0 Pro, they tend to worsen as patient age increases. Ratings on all measures, with the exception of age-appropriateness, were slightly higher for responses generated for male patients as compared to female patients with GPT-4-turbo, while the gender differences were less pronounced with Gemini 1.0 Pro. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that off-the-shelf LLMs have the potential to produce accurate, complete, and age-appropriate explanations of common pediatric surgeries with low possibility of demographic bias. Inter-model variability in areas such as quality of response, age-appropriateness and gender differences were also observed, signaling the need for additional validation and fine-tuning based on the clinical content. Such tools could be implemented at the point of care or in other patient education settings and personalized to ensure effective, equitable communication of pertinent medical information with demonstration of clinician-rated content quality. STUDY TYPE: This is a pilot study evaluating the performance of large language models (LLMs) as patient-centered communication aids in pediatric surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV (pilot study).
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.