ArticleAndrology2026
Online Andrology: Real-World Status Quo of Patients' Online Information Sources and Comparison With Large Language Models in Germany.
Article in Andrology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe internet, including websites and large language models (LLMs), is an increasingly important information resource for medical patients. However, information quality varies, potentially leading to misinformation. Andrological patients may particularly rely on online sources due to the sensitive nature of their conditions.
objectivesTo assess the prevalence and quality of internet research among andrological patients and evaluate common online sources for comprehensibility, readability, and accuracy. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients (n = 283) at four German andrological centers completed a questionnaire on their online information behavior between November 2022 and October 2023. Common online sources were objectively evaluated using the DISCERN tool and Flesch readability index in 2023. Popular LLMs were also assessed in October 2024 and compared to traditional websites.
results67% (n = 190/283) of andrological patients seek medical information before appointments, primarily using the internet (52%, n = 148/283) and general practitioners (49%, n = 139/283). Patients under 50 predominantly use online sources (60%, n = 74/122). Official medical association websites and Wikipedia are preferred, but 30% also use commercial sites (n = 91/283). In general, most common websites and LLMs provide sufficient information but lack easy comprehensibility and readability. DISCUSSION: The study highlights the widespread use of online resources by andrological patients and emphasizes the importance of high-quality medical information. While online tools show promise, the value of physician-patient communication remains irreplaceable and cannot be replaced by chatting with LLMs.
conclusionOfficial medical association should provide accurate and easily understood information for andrological patients. Efforts to improve the online media literacy and communication skills of medical personnel are necessary. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered in the German WHO primary registry, the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) (Number: DRKS00029651).
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.