ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
Artificial intelligence in patient education: evaluating large language models for understanding rheumatology literature.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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.
- Large Language Model Simplification of Open Access Pediatric Strabismus Literature: Cross-Sectional Validation of Readability and Clinical Fidelity.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Quality and readability of AI-generated information on bipolar disorder: a cross-sectional content analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of Chinese large language model performance on atrial fibrillation questions.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 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
Background: Inadequate health literacy hinders positive health outcomes, yet medical literature often exceeds the general population's comprehension level. While health authorities recommend patient materials be at a sixth-grade reading level, scientific articles typically require college-level proficiency. Large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT show potential for simplifying complex text, possibly bridging this gap. Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness of ChatGPT 4.0 in enhancing the readability of peer-reviewed rheumatology articles for layperson comprehension. Methods: Twelve open-access rheumatology articles authored by the senior investigators were included. Baseline readability was evaluated utilizing Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) indices. Each article was processed by ChatGPT 4.0 with a prompt requesting simplification to a sixth-grade level. Two expert rheumatologists evaluated the generated summaries' appropriateness (accuracy, absence of errors/omissions). Readability changes were analyzed using paired Results: ChatGPT significantly improved readability ( Conclusions: ChatGPT effectively lowered the reading complexity of specialized rheumatology literature, making it more accessible than the original publications. However, the achieved 10th-grade reading level still exceeds the recommended sixth-grade level for patient education materials. While LLMs are a promising tool, their output may require further refinement or expert review to meet optimal health literacy standards and ensure equitable patient understanding in rheumatology.
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.