ArticleInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2026
Artificial intelligence in obstetrics and gynecology: Evaluating ChatGPT and Google Gemini in answering patient questions.
Article in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2026. 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.
- The Role of Large Language Models in Hormonal Contraception Consultation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Why patient organizations are important to improve care for people with Lynch syndrome.Familial cancer · 2026Article
- A Comparison of a Customized Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD)-Specific Generative AI Chatbot and General-Purpose AI Chatbots for PAD Patient Education.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo evaluate the accuracy and completeness of responses across common obstetrical and gynecologic topics generated by the large language models (LLMs) ChatGPT and Google Gemini, which have become increasingly popular for patients seeking medical information before physician consultations.
methodsTen topics were identified, five obstetrical (prenatal labs, extended carrier screen, treatments for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy, gestational diabetes, and trial of labor after cesarean section) and five gynecologic (polycystic ovary syndrome, pelvic inflammatory disease, cervical smears, mammograms, and birth control). For each condition, ChatGPT generated five of the most frequently asked patient questions, which were then presented separately to ChatGPT and Google Gemini. Board-certified Obstetrics and Gynecology physicians evaluated the responses using Likert scales for accuracy (1-6) and completeness (1-3).
resultsAcceptable response criteria were defined as an accuracy score of 5 or greater ("nearly all correct") and a completeness score of 2 or greater ("adequately complete"). Most responses from both models met these thresholds. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests demonstrated statistically significant differences in accuracy and completeness between models (P < 0.05). Inter-rater agreement was measured using intraclass correlation coefficients. For obstetrical topics, ChatGPT scored -0.047 (completeness) and 0.112 (accuracy), whereas Google Gemini scored 0.367 and 0.205, respectively. For gynecologic topics, ChatGPT scored 0.328 and 0.20, compared with Google Gemini at 0.151 and -0.08.
conclusionBoth LLMs provided largely accurate and complete responses to patient questions. ChatGPT demonstrated stronger outcomes overall, suggesting potential utility in patient education; however, patients should confirm online information with physicians given the limitations of LLMs.
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.