Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41395370›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

DiaGuide-LLM-Using large language models for patient-specific education and health guidance in diabetes.

Kristin Skjervold, Henriette Nordahl Sævig, Helge Ræder, Arvid Lundervold, Alexander Selvikvåg Lundervold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kristin Skjervold *Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Henriette Nordahl Sævig *Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Helge RæderDepartment of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Arvid LundervoldDepartment of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Alexander Selvikvåg LundervoldMohn Medical Imaging and Visualization (MMIV) Centre, Department of Radiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective diabetes care relies on communication, patient empowerment, and lifestyle management. However, rising prevalence and workforce shortages challenge current care models. Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to support healthcare delivery by providing personalized health information. While prior studies show promising results, few have compared LLM-generated responses with those from healthcare professionals in chronic disease contexts, particularly from end-users' perspectives. This study compared GPT-4o and healthcare professional responses to diabetes-related questions, evaluating them on knowledge, helpfulness, and empathy. It also explored correlations between these qualities and differences based on participants' educational background. Using a cross-sectional experimental design, 1,810 evaluations were collected through an online questionnaire (November 2024-January 2025). Participants rated responses on 5-point Likert scales for knowledge, helpfulness, and empathy. For all metrics combined, GPT-4o received higher ratings in 46.7% of evaluations (95% CI: 28.8%-64.5%), while healthcare professionals were preferred in 23.3% (95% CI: 8.2%-38.5%). Participants with lower education levels rated GPT-4o significantly higher across all dimensions, while those with ≥4 years of higher education rated it higher for empathy and helpfulness. Quality measures were strongly correlated. Although differences were statistically significant, the observed effect sizes were small and should be interpreted as modest in practical terms. These findings assess perceived quality and accessibility of healthcare communication from end-user perspectives and suggest that LLMs may enhance the perceived quality and accessibility of healthcare communication, particularly among individuals with lower educational attainment. Further research is needed to determine their appropriate role in clinical practice, including objective assessment of clinical accuracy.

Indexed as

diabetesempathyhealth guidancehelpfulnessknowledgelarge language modelsLikert scale

Identifiers

PMID41395370
PMCPMC12698645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.