ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026
Can a large language model inform patients about auditory brainstem implants?
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveThis study evaluated the performance of ChatGPT-4o in responding to patient-centered questions concerning auditory brainstem implantation (ABI), with a focus on content quality and readability.
methodsA total of 51 real-world patient questions related to ABI were reviewed and grouped into five thematic categories: diagnosis and candidacy, surgical procedures and complications, device function and mapping, rehabilitation and expected outcomes, and daily life and long-term concerns. Responses were independently assessed by two audiologists and one otologist across four domains-accuracy, comprehensiveness, clarity, and credibility-using a 5-point Likert scale. Readability was evaluated using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) formulas. Kruskal-Wallis and Friedman tests were used to examine statistical differences across question categories and evaluation dimensions.
resultsChatGPT-4o achieved consistently high scores across all evaluative domains, with mean values exceeding 4.5. Clarity received the highest average score (4.72). No significant differences were found between thematic categories or across dimensions. However, readability analysis revealed that most responses required college-level reading proficiency (FKGL = 13.3 ± 2), particularly in the domains of diagnosis and surgical content, and were rated as "difficult" according to Flesch Reading Ease scores (FRE < 50).
conclusionChatGPT-4o shows potential as a supportive communication tool in the context of ABI patient education. However, its application in clinical practice remains limited by issues of readability and clinical specificity. Ongoing refinement and medical oversight will be essential to ensure safe and effective integration into healthcare settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41136581What 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.