ArticleJournal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America2025
The ABCs of PEMs: Using Artificial Intelligence to Enhance the Readability of Patient Educational Materials in Pediatric Orthopaedics.
Article in Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America, 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.
- What Resources Are Available for Parents Online? A Readability, Quality, and Source Evaluation of Website and AI-Generated Content on Inherited Pediatric Orthopaedic Conditions.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
- Exploring evaluation measures of large language models for family caregiver use: A scoping review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While the American Medical Association and National Institute of Health recommend patient educational materials (PEMs) be written at a 6th-grade reading level, studies consistently show that PEMs in orthopaedics are written at the 10th-grade level or higher. This mismatch disproportionately affects patients with limited health literacy, who are at increased risk for poor clinical outcomes. This study investigates the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) platforms, including ChatGPT and OpenEvidence, to generate PEMs in pediatric orthopaedics that reach readability standards without sacrificing clinical accuracy. Methods: Fifty-one of the most common pediatric orthopaedic conditions were selected using the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons OrthoInfo PEM database. For each condition, PEMs were generated using two AI platforms: ChatGPT 4 and Open Evidence utilizing a standardized prompt requesting a sixth-grade level explanation that included relevant anatomy, symptoms, physical exam findings, and treatment options. Readability was assessed using eight validated readability metrics via the Python Textstat library. PEMs were scored for accuracy and completeness by four blinded, pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. Interrater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and statistical comparisons were performed using paired t-tests. Results: ChatGPT-generated PEMs had the lowest average reading grade level (8.7) compared to OrthoInfo (10.8) and Open Evidence (10.1). OrthoInfo PEMs were rated highest for accuracy and completeness (total accuracy: 6.95; total completeness: 6.98), compared to Chat GPT (total accuracy: 6.15; total completeness: 5.90) and Open Evidence (total accuracy: 3.25; total completeness: 3.05), but ChatGPT approached OrthoInfo in several subdomains, including treatment descriptions, timeline, and follow-up recommendations. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the promise of AI platforms in generating readable, patient-friendly educational materials in pediatric orthopaedics. While OrthoInfo remains the gold standard in content accuracy and completeness, it falls short of national readability guidelines. AI tools like ChatGPT and OpenEvidence produced significantly more readable PEMs and, in some categories, approached the quality of expert-validated materials. These findings suggest a potential role for AI-assisted content creation in bridging the health literacy gap. However, concerns surrounding accuracy, hallucinations, and source transparency must be addressed before AI-generated PEMs can be safely integrated into clinical practice. Key Concepts: (1)Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to computer systems capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence, such as language processing; in this study, AI was used to revise and assess the readability of patient education materials.(2)Patient education materials (PEMs) are written or visual tools designed to inform patients and families about medical conditions, treatments, and procedures; they play a critical role in supporting shared decision-making in pediatric orthopaedics.(3)Readbility refers to how easily a written text can be understood by a target audience; improving the readability of PEMs ensures that patients and caregivers can comprehend essential health information.(4)Health literacy is the ability of individuals to obtain, process, and understand basic health information needed to make informed decisions; enhancing the readability of PEMs supports improved health literacy in pediatric populations.(5)Natural language processing (NLP) is a branch of AI that enables computers to understand and generate human language; in this study, NLP was used to revise PEMs and improve their readability and accessibility. Level of Evidence: IV.
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.