ArticlePloS one2026
Evaluation of the performance of large language models in responding to medical questions related to multiple sclerosis: A case study of large language models including ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok and Copilot.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate and compare the performance of four publicly available large language models-ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, and Grok-in answering medical questions related to Multiple Sclerosis, focusing on accuracy, transparency, and clinical actionability.
methodsFour publicly available large language models (ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, and Copilot) were selected based on accessibility and their ability to respond to medical questions. A total of 25 questions-five for each of the five key domains (diagnosis, treatment, prevention, disease control, and disease management)-were developed. The responses generated by the models were evaluated using the DISCERN-AI and NLAT-AI assessment tools.
resultsThe evaluation of four AI chatbots-ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, and Grok-on multiple sclerosis (MS) content revealed clear differences in quality and consistency. According to DISCERN-AI criteria, Gemini achieved the highest overall quality, excelling in relevance, transparency, balance, and acknowledgment of uncertainty. Grok ranked second, showing generally balanced results with slightly lower scores than Gemini. ChatGPT exhibited strong yet uneven performance, with particular weaknesses in content addressing vulnerable populations. Copilot demonstrated the weakest overall performance, with consistently lower scores across nearly all criteria.
conclusionsGemini demonstrated the strongest and most consistent performance across all domains, followed by Grok with slightly lower but balanced results. ChatGPT showed strong yet uneven outcomes, with weaknesses in addressing vulnerable populations. Copilot ranked lowest, consistently underperforming across metrics. These findings highlight significant differences among large language models in generating accurate and clinically relevant responses for multiple sclerosis, underscoring the importance of considering each model's strengths and limitations in healthcare applications.
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.