ArticleDigital health
Artificial intelligence chatbots as information sources for postherpetic neuralgia: An evaluation of reliability and readability.
Article in Digital health. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots are increasingly used for online health information seeking and have become a common source of information on postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). The quality and readability of the information they provide have not been systematically evaluated. Objective: To assess the quality, transparency, and readability of postherpetic neuralgia information generated by mainstream artificial intelligence chatbots and to examine whether this content meets the recommended sixth-grade reading level for patient education materials. Methods: Using the MeSH term Neuralgia, Postherpetic, we identified 11 highly relevant postherpetic neuralgia-related search queries worldwide from 2020 to 2025 through Google Trends. These queries were entered verbatim into ChatGPT-4o, Gemini-1.5, Perplexity Pro, and Copilot using a standardised input procedure. Responses were assessed with DISCERN, EQIP, JAMA, and GQS for information quality, completeness, transparency, and overall educational value. Readability was evaluated with ARI, FRES, GFI, FKGL, CL, and SMOG. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for between-model comparisons, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare readability indices against sixth-grade reading benchmarks. Results: DISCERN, EQIP, and GQS scores differed significantly across chatbots in DISCERN (P < 0.001), EQIP (P < 0.001), and GQS ( Conclusion: Mainstream artificial intelligence chatbots can provide postherpetic neuralgia information with moderate quality, but the readability of this content remains consistently above recommended patient education levels. The findings should be interpreted within the scope of the selected chatbots, default operational settings, search queries, and the time-sensitive nature of chatbot outputs. Further improvement in source reporting and plain-language presentation remains warranted.
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.