Observational studyJournal of clinical nursing2026
Understandability and Actionability of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Lymphedema Education Material in Patients Undergoing Breast Cancer Surgery: Expert Evaluation.
Observational study in Journal of clinical nursing, 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.
- AI in Health care: A Catalyst for Enhancement, Not Replacement.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- Understandability and Actionability of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Lymphedema Education Material in Patients Undergoing Breast Cancer Surgery: Expert Evaluation.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the artificial intelligence-assisted lymphedema education material in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery.
designA comprehensive, successful methodological design was used to evaluate the portability of the expandable, AI-supported lymphedema education material for breast cancer. The study was reported in accordance with the STROBE statement (see Data S1 for the completed STROBE [Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology] checklist). When preparing the AI-supported lymphedema education material managed with breast cancer treatment, it is first determined in the education of patients. Then, the commands of the Chat GBT-4 program are included in the scope of the transferred education content. For the created education content, readability was first evaluated and expert opinion was taken for the final version of the draft.
methodsWhile preparing the AI-assisted lymphedema education material in the study, expert opinions were obtained, and the educational needs of the patients were determined by scanning the literature. Then, 12 commands were given in the ChatGPT-4 program to create the educational content. Formulas were used to evaluate the readability of the created educational content in Turkish and the readability of the health literature. The validity of the lymphedema education material was presented to 10 experts. The experts evaluated the understandability and actionability of the educational material using the Patient Education Materials Evaluation Tool and the Global Quality Scale, which evaluates the quality of the educational material.
resultsIt was concluded that the readability index of the lymphedema education material for Turkish was 67.3, and the Turkish readability level was 'easily understandable'. The readability index of health literature was found to be 11.28, 9.68, 10.58, 39.0, and 11.26, respectively. When the internal consistency coefficient between the experts was examined, it was found to be 0.74. It was determined that the Patient Education Materials Evaluation Tool understandability score average was 92.10 ± 9.03, and the actionability score average was 81.60 ± 18.47. The Global Quality Scale score average, which evaluates the suitability and quality of the content of the AI-supported educational material, was found to be 4.10 ± 0.87.
conclusionAt the end of the study, it was determined that the educational material was reasonable regarding understandability and actionability. The Turkish readability level was also reasonable and easily understandable. IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSION: This study is one of the proactive attempts to use AI in preparing educational materials for nurses and healthcare professionals. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.
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.