ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2026
The potential of large language models to address patients' preoperative questions before anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients increasingly use large language models (LLMs) to obtain medical information, including preoperative guidance. However, the quality of LLM-generated responses to questions regarding anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) remains unclear. This study evaluated the performance of GPT-5 and GROK 4 in answering common preoperative ACDF questions. We hypothesized that both models would provide generally accurate and comprehensible responses while demonstrating limitations in completeness, clinical nuance, and personalization. Methods: As an expert-rated pilot study, eighteen frequently asked ACDF preoperative questions were independently entered into GPT-5 and GROK 4 without additional prompting. Responses were evaluated by three attending spine neurosurgeons and one neurosurgery resident using 5-point Likert scales for accuracy, completeness, and comprehensibility. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and ordinal Krippendorff's alpha. Readability was measured using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). Results: Mean accuracy scores were identical for GPT-5 and GROK 4 (4.52). GROK 4 demonstrated higher completeness (4.61 Conclusions: LLMs provide generally accurate and understandable responses to common ACDF preoperative questions but lack nuanced risk stratification and individualized clinical guidance. These findings support their use as adjuncts, rather than replacements, for physician-led counseling.
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.