ArticleClinical rheumatology2026
ChatGPT as a tool to improve readability of rheumatology patient education materials: a positive start with significant hurdles.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Large Language Model Simplification of Open Access Pediatric Strabismus Literature: Cross-Sectional Validation of Readability and Clinical Fidelity.JMIR formative research · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient education materials are vital to health education and, according to the American Medical Association (AMA), should not be written above a 6th grade reading level (Weiss 2003). We aim to assess American College of Rheumatology (ACR) patient education readability and use ChatGPT 3.5 to adjust it to a 6th grade reading level.
methodsFour validated readability assessment tests were selected to assess the readability levels for 96 online ACR patient education materials on rheumatic conditions and treatments (American College of Rheumatology: Diseases and Conditions n.d; American College of Rheumatology: Treatments n.d.) the Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook Index (SMOG). All education materials were inputted into ChatGPT with the prompt "Rewrite the following text at a 5th grade reading level:". These converted excerpts were evaluated for readability using the online readability scoring software (Readability Formulas. Readability Scoring System 14).
resultsThe mean (± SD) readability ratings of GFI, FKGL, CLI, and SMOG from the 96 original ACR patient education materials were 14.24 (1.85), 11.50 (1.74), 13.31 (1.42), and 10.33 (1.29), respectively. The ACR materials had a mean reading level of 12th grade (12.02 ± 1.35). After the ChatGPT prompt, the calculated average reading level for the simplified education materials ranged from grades 7 to 13, with a mean of 9.35 ± 1.12. The mean (± SD) readability ratings of GFI, FKGL, CLI, and SMOG for the simplified versions were 10.70 (1.39), 8.29 (1.21), 10.18 (1.11), and 7.68 (1.05), respectively.
conclusionThe readability of ACR patient education materials exceeds AMA recommendations, and while ChatGPT significantly lowered the reading level, it failed to reach the 6th-grade level. Key Points • The readability of ACR patient education materials exceeds the AMA reading level recommendations. • AI has the potential to enhance the readability of patient education materials but failed to reach the desired 6th grade reading level. • The inherent bias of ChatGPT must be considered when evaluating the potential for patient education material optimization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41455856What 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.