ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Accuracy of AI chatbots in answering frequently asked questions on cervical cancer.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-5-generated clinical management recommendations for HPV infection and cervical premalignant lesions: a scenario-based expert assessment study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Current practices and perceptions of ChatGPT in gynecologic oncology: results from a cross-sectional questionnaire (TRSGO-AI-001).BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Evaluation and comparison of large language model responses to patient questions after diagnosis of high-risk human papillomavirus infection: an expert-rated digital patient education study.Frontiers in public 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
Objective: To compare the accuracy of Deepseek and ChatGPT in answering frequently asked questions (FAQs) about cervical cancer. Methods: To compile a list of FAQs concerning cervical cancer, a comprehensive search was conducted on social media and community platforms. The answer keys for all the selected questions were created on the basis of the guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for cervical cancer. The answers given by Deepseek-R1 and ChatGPT O1 were scored according to the Global Quality Score (GQS). Results: A total of 74 FAQs covered a diverse range of topics related to cervical cancer, including diagnosis ( Conclusion: Both DeepSeek and ChatGPT demonstrated accurate and satisfactory responses to FAQs about cervical cancer when evaluated according to the GQS. However, in regard to treatment issues, a cautious attitude should be maintained. Compared to ChatGPT, DeepSeek stands out for its free availability, which makes it more accessible in resource-limited scenarios to the public.
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.