ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Comparative Evaluation of AI Chatbots for Testicular Cancer Education: Validity, Information Quality, and Readability.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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.
- ASO Author Reflections: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Bladder Cancer: Comparative Knowledge Retrieval and Clinical Reasoning of DeepSeek and ChatGPT.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLarge language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in health information seeking, but their performance in testicular cancer education remains unclear. This study evaluated the validity, reliability, and readability of responses generated by four widely used artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots.
methodsFour AI chatbots (ChatGPT 5.2, Copilot 2025, DeepSeek V3.2, and Gemini 2.5 Pro) were assessed. Structured clinical-knowledge accuracy was evaluated using 250 testicular cancer-related multiple choice questions across five domains, each administered to each model three times. The information quality of patient-facing responses was assessed using 12 patient-oriented questions derived from Google Trends queries and refined based on clinical experience, with responses rated using DISCERN, Ensuring Quality Information for Patients (EQIP), Global Quality Scale (GQS), and Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria. Readability was measured using six standard readability indices and compared with the sixth-grade level recommended by the American Medical Association and the National Institutes of Health.
resultsAll four chatbots demonstrated high structured clinical-knowledge accuracy, with overall multiple choice question accuracy exceeding 96%. ChatGPT 5.2 achieved the highest accuracy (98.40%), followed by Gemini 2.5 Pro (97.20%), DeepSeek V3.2 (97.07%), and Copilot 2025 (96.93%). Overall accuracy differed significantly among models (p = 0.026), and only ChatGPT 5.2 significantly outperformed Gemini 2.5 Pro after Bonferroni correction. ChatGPT 5.2 also achieved the highest information-quality scores on DISCERN, EQIP, and GQS, whereas JAMA scores were uniformly low across all models. DeepSeek V3.2 generated the most readable responses overall. However, none of the chatbots met recommended readability thresholds, and all significantly deviated from sixth-grade readability benchmarks.
conclusionAI chatbots showed high validity in answering testicular cancer-related questions, but important differences remained in information quality and readability. ChatGPT 5.2 provided the most reliable responses, whereas DeepSeek V3.2 produced the most readable content. These tools may support patient education, but they cannot yet replace clinician-guided and evidence-based communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42518148What 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.