ArticleEmergency medicine international2026
Accuracy and Reliability of AI Models in Emergency Myocardial Infarction Education.
Article in Emergency medicine international, 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.
- Accuracy and Reliability of AI Models in Emergency Myocardial Infarction Education.Emergency medicine international · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Large language models (LLMs) are emerging tools for patient education. This study evaluated the performance of three LLMs in delivering accurate, reliable, and readable educational content regarding AMI. Methods: In this cross-sectional study (February-March 2025), a clinical case of a patient with an inferior STEMI ECG was presented to three LLMs: ChatGPT-4o, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, and Gemini Advanced 2.0 Flash. Each model answered 30 patient-focused questions across three domains: general disease knowledge, diagnostic processes, and treatment approaches. Responses were assessed by four emergency medicine associate professors (10-20 years of experience) using a 5-point Likert scale for accuracy, DISCERN and EQIP tools for reliability and quality, and standard readability indices. Results: ChatGPT-4o achieved the highest accuracy score (4.38 ± 0.38), followed by Claude 3.7 (4.09 ± 0.55) and Gemini 2.0 (3.92 ± 0.41) ( Conclusions: LLMs show promise in supporting patient education on AMI. While ChatGPT-4o offers superior accuracy and reliability, Claude 3.7 enhances accessibility through clearer language. This is the first study comparing three LLMs for AMI education in an emergency context, underscoring that physician oversight remains essential for educational applications in emergency medicine.
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.