ArticleArchives of plastic surgery2026
Comparing the Readability and Content Quality of Online Patient Education Materials and ChatGPT-Generated Patient Education Materials for Breast Cancer Surgery and Reconstruction.
Article in Archives of plastic surgery, 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.
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: Patients undergoing breast cancer surgery and reconstruction seek information using online patient education materials (OPEMs). The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Medical Association (AMA) recommend a sixth-grade reading level for OPEMs. In recent years, Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT), a large language model (LLM), has shown potential utility in patient education. This study compares the readability and content quality of OPEMs on breast cancer surgery and reconstruction with ChatGPT-generated materials. Methods: Google searches were conducted in January 2025 to identify relevant OPEMs for breast cancer surgery and reconstruction. For each search term, ChatGPT 4.0 was prompted to generate patient education guides using two approaches: (1) Standard prompting and (2) simplified prompting to align with NIH/AHA recommendations ("write the guide like I am in sixth grade"). Readability and content quality metrics were assessed. Results: Ninety-nine OPEMs and 60 ChatGPT responses (30 standard, 30 simplified) were analyzed. Median Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) was 10.8 for OPEMs, 10.0 for standard ChatGPT responses, and 5.8 for simplified ChatGPT responses. OPEMs and standard ChatGPT responses significantly exceeded NIH/AMA recommendations ( Conclusion: OPEMs on breast cancer surgery and reconstruction exceed recommended readability levels. ChatGPT, when prompted to simplify, produced materials consistent with NIH/AMA guidelines while maintaining content quality. Using ChatGPT for patient education may enhance accessibility and patient comprehension of health information.
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.