Flesch Reading Ease Score Research Articles

Use of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Interpretation of Pathology Reports.

Anatomic pathology reports are an essential part of health care, containing vital diagnostic and prognostic information. Currently, most patients have access to their test results online. However, the reports are complex and are generally incomprehensible to laypeople. Artificial intelligence chatbots could potentially simplify pathology reports. To evaluate the ability of large language model chatbots to accurately explain pathology reports to patients. This cross-sectional study used 1134 pathology reports from January 1, 2018, to May 31, 2023, from a multispecialty hospital in Brooklyn, New York. A new chat was started for each report, and both chatbots (Bard [Google Inc], hereinafter chatbot 1; GPT-4 [OpenAI], hereinafter chatbot 2) were asked in sequential prompts to explain the reports in simple terms and identify key information. Chatbot responses were generated between June 1 and August 31, 2023. The mean readability scores of the original and simplified reports were compared. Two reviewers independently screened and flagged reports with potential errors. Three pathologists reviewed the flagged reports and categorized them as medically correct, partially medically correct, or medically incorrect; they also recorded any instances of hallucinations. Outcomes included improved mean readability scores and a medically accurate interpretation. For the 1134 reports included, the Flesch-Kincaid grade level decreased from a mean of 13.19 (95% CI, 12.98-13.41) to 8.17 (95% CI, 8.08-8.25; t = 45.29; P < .001) by chatbot 1 and 7.45 (95% CI, 7.35-7.54; t = 49.69; P < .001) by chatbot 2. The Flesch Reading Ease score was increased from a mean of 10.32 (95% CI, 8.69-11.96) to 61.32 (95% CI, 60.80-61.84; t = -63.19; P < .001) by chatbot 1 and 70.80 (95% CI, 70.32-71.28; t = -74.61; P < .001) by chatbot 2. Chatbot 1 interpreted 993 reports (87.57%) correctly, 102 (8.99%) partially correctly, and 39 (3.44%) incorrectly; chatbot 2 interpreted 1105 reports (97.44%) correctly, 24 (2.12%) partially correctly, and 5 (0.44%) incorrectly. Chatbot 1 had 32 instances of hallucinations (2.82%), while chatbot 2 had 3 (0.26%). The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that artificial intelligence chatbots were able to simplify pathology reports. However, some inaccuracies and hallucinations occurred. Simplified reports should be reviewed by clinicians before distribution to patients.

A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Readability of Online Information Regarding Hip Osteoarthritis.

Introduction Osteoarthritis (OA) is an age-related degenerative joint disease. There is a 25% risk of symptomatic hip OA in patients who live up to 85 years of age. It can impair a person's daily activities and increase their reliance on healthcare services. It is primarily managed with education, weight loss and exercise, supplemented with pharmacological interventions. Poor health literacy is associated with negative treatment outcomes and patient dissatisfaction. A literature search found there are no previously published studies examining the readability of online information about hip OA. Objectives To assess the readability of healthcare websites regarding hip OA. Methods The terms "hip pain", "hip osteoarthritis", "hip arthritis", and "hip OA" were searched on Google and Bing. Of 240 websites initially considered, 74 unique websites underwent evaluation using the WebFX online readability software (WebFX®, Harrisburg, USA). Readability was determined using the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES), Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), and Automated Readability Index (ARI). In line with recommended guidelines and previous studies, FRES >65 or a grade level score of sixth grade and under was considered acceptable. Results The average FRES was 56.74±8.18 (range 29.5-79.4). Only nine (12.16%) websites had a FRES score >65. The average FKGL score was 7.62±1.69 (range 4.2-12.9). Only seven (9.46%) websites were written at or below a sixth-grade level according to the FKGL score. The average GFI score was 9.20±2.09 (range 5.6-16.5). Only one (1.35%) website was written at or below a sixth-grade level according to the GFI score.The average SMOG score was 7.29±1.41 (range 5.4-12.0). Only eight (10.81%) websites were written at or below a sixth-grade level according to the SMOG score. The average CLI score was 13.86±1.75 (range 9.6-19.7). All 36 websites were written above a sixth-grade level according to the CLI score. The average ARI score was 6.91±2.06 (range 3.1-14.0). Twenty-eight(37.84%) websites were written at or below a sixth-grade level according to the ARI score. One-sample t-tests showed that FRES (p<0.001, CI -10.2 to -6.37), FKGL (p<0.001, CI 1.23 to 2.01), GFI (p<0.001, CI 2.72 to 3.69), SMOG (p<0.001, CI 0.97 to 1.62), CLI (p<0.001, CI 7.46 to 8.27), and ARI (p<0.001, CI 0.43 to 1.39) scores were significantly different from the accepted standard. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) testing of FRES scores (p=0.009) and CLI scores (p=0.009) showed a significant difference between categories. Post hoc testing showed a significant difference between academic and non-profit categories for FRES scores (p=0.010, CI -15.17 to -1.47) and CLI scores (p=0.008, CI 0.35 to 3.29). Conclusions Most websites regarding hip OA are written above recommended reading levels, hence exceeding the comprehension levels of the average patient. Readability of these resources must be improved to improve patient access to online healthcare information which can lead to improved patient understanding of their own condition and treatment outcomes.

Clear aligner therapy informed consent forms: A quality and readability evaluation

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the quality and readability of content contained within clear aligner therapy (CAT) informed consent forms. CAT informed consent forms were identified via an online search. The presence of details related to CAT-related processes, risks, benefits and alternatives in each form was recorded. A 4-point Likert type scale was used to determine the quality of content (QOC). The readability of content was evaluated with the Simple Measure of Gobbledegook (SMOG) and Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). A total of 42 forms satisfied selection criteria. Nineteen (45.2%) were authored by companies who provided aligners to patients via clinicians. The QOC regarding CAT-related treatment processes [median 2.0; IQR 0, 2] and benefits [median 2.0; IQR 1, 2] was adequate. The QOC scores regarding treatment alternatives, consequences of no treatment and relapse were poor. There was no difference (P=0.59) in the median (IQR) QOC of the informed consent forms provided by direct-to-consumer (DTC) aligner providers [10 (8.25, 16.25)] and non-DTC aligner providers [12 (10, 14)]. The median (IQR) SMOG score was 12.1 (10.9, 12.7) and FRES was 39.0 (36.0, 44.25). The QOC of the evaluated forms was incomplete and poor. The content was difficult to read and failed to reach recommended readability standards. Consent is unlikely to be valid if it is based solely on the content of the forms. Clinicians need to be aware of the limitations of informed consent forms for CAT particularly in relation to alternatives, prognosis, risks, and the need for long-term maintenance of results.

Thematic coverage and readability of online patient information on cochlear implant care

IntroductionThe treatment of patients with a cochlear implant (CI) is usually an elective, complex and interdisciplinary process. As an important source of information, patients often access the internet prior to treatment. The quality of internet-based information regarding thematic coverage has not yet been analysed in detail. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyse the information on CI care available on the internet regarding its thematic coverage and readability.Material methodsEight search phrases related to CI care were defined as part of the study. A checklist for completeness of thematic coverage was then created for each search phrase. The current German CI clinical practice guideline and the white paper on CI care in Germany were used as a basis. As a further parameter, readability was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease Scores. The search phrases were used for an internet search with Google. The first ten results were then analysed with regard to thematic coverage, readability and the provider of the website.ResultsA total of 80 websites were identified, which were set up by 54 different providers (16 providers were found in multiple entries) from eight different provider groups. The average completeness of thematic coverage was 41.6 ± 28.2%. Readability according to the Flesch Reading Ease Score was categorised as "hard to read" on average (34.7 ± 14.2 points, range: 0–72). There was a negative statistically significant correlation between the thematic coverage of content and readability (Spearman's rank correlation: r = − 0.413, p = 0.00014).SummaryThe completeness of thematic coverage of information on CI care available on the internet was highly heterogeneous and had a significant negative correlation with the readability. This result should be taken into account by both the providers of internet information and by patients when using internet-based information on CI care and help to further improve the quality of web-based information.

Examining Accessibility of Freestanding Abortion Clinics for People With Disabilities [ID 2683401

INTRODUCTION: People with disabilities face numerous barriers to equitable health care but have a fundamental right to safe abortion care. This study reviews the accessibility of freestanding abortion clinics in the United States for those with disabilities. METHODS: A quantitative data analysis was performed. All freestanding abortion clinics registered with the Abortion Care Network were included except those directly affiliated with a university or general gynecology clinic and those exclusively operating online. Two independent reviewers analyzed clinic websites after an interrater reliability test. Independent variables analyzed included Flesch Reading Ease score, presence of a statement affirming dignity for all persons, online appointment scheduling, transparent pricing, and financial assistance information. RESULTS: Seventy-two clinics were included. No clinic explicitly stated that their facilities were accessible to individuals with disabilities. Fifty-four percent had a statement affirming dignity for all persons, most of which were in the Northeast or West Coast. 6% had an accessibility widget, and 63% had online appointment scheduling. Mean Flesch Reading Ease score was 55.37 correlating to a 10th- to 12th-grade reading level. 33% had transparent pricing information, and 71% offered information on financial assistance. CONCLUSION: Several accessibility barriers were identified on these websites. Freestanding abortion clinics should focus on enhancing accessibility by explicitly affirming dignity for all patients, providing clear information on facility accessibility, and implementing an accessibility widget, online scheduling, and transparent pricing. Furthermore, these websites should be written at an easily comprehensible reading level. These simple changes would make these clinics more accessible for those with disabilities.

The complexity of online patient education materials for wound care strategies: A readability analysis

BackgroundIn the United States, over 6 million people are affected by chronic wounds. Patients often rely on the Internet for treatment information; however, these educational materials typically exceed the average eighth-grade health literacy level. This study aimed to assess the readability and language accessibility of online patient education materials on wound care strategies. MethodsA search was conducted on Google for articles related to wound care strategies. The first 12 unique websites from each search strategy were selected for further analysis. Readability was assessed using 11 tests, with the mean scores calculated for each. ResultsA total of 66 articles pertaining to wound care strategies were retrieved from 43 websites. All articles had an average reading grade level of 13.5 ± 2.5 and an average reading age of 18.7 ± 2.5 years. Websites were categorized by the following sources: academic (34.9%), reagent/biologic manufacturers (27.9%), wound care (18.6%), news media organizations (14%), and other (4.7%). Flesch Reading Ease Score, graded from 0 for most difficult to 100 for least difficult, was found to be highest for academic websites (44.2, P = .01) and lowest for news media websites (24.9, P = .01). Academic websites were available in the more languages compared to all other website categories (P < .01). ConclusionOnline materials related to wound care strategies often exceed the National Institute of Health recommended eighth-grade reading level. This study emphasizes the need for healthcare providers to create more accessible educational materials to address the gap in health literacy and optimize patient care.

Analysis of informed consent documents for compliance with ICMR guidelines for biomedical and health research

Abstract Background: Ethical conduct of research depends on the voluntary expression of consent and adequate disclosure of information about the research in informed consent documents (ICDs). Objectives: The objective of this study was to analyze ICDs of academic studies for compliance with National Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical and Health Research laid down by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and to determine the readability of ICDs using the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level scale and Flesch reading-ease (FRE) score. Methodology: ICDs of academic research projects submitted during 2020–22 were retrieved from the IEC office and analyzed for compliance with ICMR 2017 guidelines. The readability of the documents was assessed by the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level Scale and FRE score. Results: Among 177 protocols analyzed, the most common were epidemiological studies (36.72%), followed by diagnostic studies (28.81%). Vernacular translations of ICDs were present in significantly more studies in 2022 (χ 2 = 7.18, P = 0.02) as compared to 2020 and 2021. FREs score was 45.75 ± 10.76, and Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level was 8.67 ± 1.44. Content analysis of participant information sheet (PIS) revealed that significantly more PIS submitted in 2022 mentioned expected duration of participation (χ 2 = 6.95, P &lt; 0.001), benefit to patient/community (χ 2 = 26.63, P &lt; 0.001), disclosure of foreseeable risk or discomfort (χ 2 = 21.72, P &lt; 0.001), payment for participation (χ 2 = 21.72, P &lt; 0.001), and identity of research team and contact details (χ 2 = 18.58, P &lt; 0.001). Compliance score was significantly better in 2022 as compared to 2020 and 2021. Conclusion: Gradually, ICDs became more compliant with ICMR guidelines. Still, there is scope for improvement in ICDs regarding content and readability so that patients can comprehend facts easily to make informed decisions in a real sense.

ChatGPT-4 Can Help Hand Surgeons Communicate Better With Patients

The American Society for Surgery of the Hand and British Society for Surgery of the Hand produce patient-focused information above the sixth-grade readability recommended by the American Medical Association. To promote health equity, patient-focused content should be aimed at an appropriate level of health literacy. Artificial intelligence-driven large language models may be able to assist hand surgery societies in improving the readability of the information provided to patients. The readability was calculated for all the articles written in English on the American Society for Surgery of the Hand and British Society for Surgery of the Hand websites, in terms of seven of the commonest readability formulas. Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer version 4 (ChatGPT-4) was then asked to rewrite each article at a sixth-grade readability level. The readability for each response was calculated and compared with the unedited articles. Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer version 4 was able to improve the readability across all chosen readability formulas and was successful in achieving a mean sixth-grade readability level in terms of the Flesch Kincaid Grade Level and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook calculations. It increased the mean Flesch Reading Ease score, with higher scores representing more readable material. This study demonstrated that ChatGPT-4 can be used to improve the readability of patient-focused material in hand surgery. However, ChatGPT-4 is interested primarily in sounding natural, and not in seeking truth, and hence, each response must be evaluated by the surgeon to ensure that information accuracy is not being sacrificed for the sake of readability by this powerful tool.

Readability level of prescribed Accounting textbooks used in South African secondary schools

The results of a study that investigated the readability of three Accounting textbooks used in South African secondary schools are presented. In South African schools, textbooks remain the primary source of course content that drives the students’ learning of the subject matter. The study followed the traditions of the positivist paradigm. The Flesch reading ease score and Gunning fog index are readability measurement methods that are helpful in measuring the difficulty or challenging nature of text in the Accounting textbooks. Using them assists teachers of Accounting who have the responsibility to choose textbooks that would assist their students to make meaning of the subject matter. Three sections from each textbook were analysed: an introduction section on budgeting, analysis and interpretation section, and section on General Accepted Accounting Principles. These topics are very important in understanding the discipline of Accounting; their readability or accessibility by students play a crucial role in learning the subject of Accounting. The results showed that some textbooks are not readable, or are not straightforward and user friendly, and are thus difficult to understand and engage with. This points to these textbooks being challenging to some Accounting students, especially since to some English is their second language. The recommendations for future research are discussed. It is suggested that authors of Accounting textbooks must consider the readability of the textbooks.

Analysis of the Most Popular Online Ankle Fracture-Related Patient Education Materials.

Given the increasing accessibility of Internet access, it is critical to ensure that the informational material available online for patient education is both accurate and readable to promote a greater degree of health literacy. This study sought to investigate the quality and readability of the most popular online resources for ankle fractures. After conducting a Google search using 6 terms related to ankle fractures, we collected the first 20 nonsponsored results for each term. Readability was evaluated using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and Gunning Fog Index (GFI) instruments. Quality was evaluated using custom created Ankle Fracture Index (AFI). A total of 46 of 120 articles met the inclusion criteria. The mean FKGL, FRE, and GFI scores were 8.4 ± 0.5, 57.5 ± 3.2, and 10.5 ± 0.5, respectively. The average AFI score was 15.4 ± 1.4, corresponding to an "acceptable" quality rating. Almost 70% of articles (n = 32) were written at or below the recommended eighth-grade reading level. Most articles discussed the need for imaging in diagnosis and treatment planning while neglecting to discuss the risks of surgery or potential future operations. We found that online patient-facing materials on ankle fractures demonstrated an eighth-grade average reading grade level and an acceptable quality on content analysis. Further work should surround increasing information regarding risk factors, complications for surgery, and long-term recovery while ensuring that readability levels remain below at least the eighth-grade level.

Readability of Online Information for Parents Concerning Paediatric In-Toeing: An Analysis of the Most Popular Online Public Sources.

Background Parents often access online resources to educate themselves on their child's condition.In-toeing, also referred to as pigeon toeing, is a common paediatric condition that has a variety of causes and is oftena cause of concern for parents. With the increasing usage of the internet, parents of children with this condition may look to the web for answers.However, to be understood by the average adult, online health information must be written at an elementary school reading level.We hypothesised that currently available online resources regarding in-toeing would score poorly on objective measures of readability and understandability. Methods Patient education materials were identified via three commonly used online search engines (Google.com, Yahoo.com, and Bing.com). The terms "intoeing" and "pigeon toeing" were used for the search. From the top 50 search results, websites were included if directed at educating patients and their families regarding in-toeing. News articles, non-text material (video), industry websites, and articles not related to in-toeing were excluded. The readability was analysed using a specialised website www.readable.com to produce the following three scores: Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), and Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG). Understandability was calculated using the 19-point Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). Results After removing duplicates, 84 unique websites were assessed for inclusion. A total of 48 websites and articles (57.14%) met the inclusion criteria. Of note, 23 articles out of 84 (27.38%) were excluded as they were intended for healthcare professionals. The means for the FRE, FKG, and GFI were 57.92 (±12.26), 7.92 (±1.91), and 9.35 (±2.36), respectively. Less than half of online resources had an FRE score at or higher than the recommended reading level for the general population. Mean understandability scores were 69.63% (±11.55%), with only 45.83% of articles being greater than the 70% requirement of adequate understandability. Conclusion Overall, online in-toeing educational materials scored poorly with respect to readability and understandability. Given the popularity of online resources in patient education, we should seek to improve this situation.Articles that are easier to read are thus more accessible to the general public and will aid in the shared decision-making process.Improved patient and parent satisfaction and overall standard of care can be expected.

GPT-4 as a Source of Patient Information for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Comparative Analysis Against Google Web Search.

Comparative study. This study aims to compare Google and GPT-4 in terms of (1) question types, (2) response readability, (3) source quality, and (4) numerical response accuracy for the top 10 most frequently asked questions (FAQs) about anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). "Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion" was searched on Google and GPT-4 on December 18, 2023. Top 10 FAQs were classified according to the Rothwell system. Source quality was evaluated using JAMA benchmark criteria and readability was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid grade level. Differences in JAMA scores, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, Flesch Reading Ease, and word count between platforms were analyzed using Student's t-tests. Statistical significance was set at the .05 level. Frequently asked questions from Google were varied, while GPT-4 focused on technical details and indications/management. GPT-4 showed a higher Flesch-Kincaid grade level (12.96 vs 9.28, P = .003), lower Flesch Reading Ease score (37.07 vs 54.85, P = .005), and higher JAMA scores for source quality (3.333 vs 1.800, P = .016). Numerically, 6 out of 10 responses varied between platforms, with GPT-4 providing broader recovery timelines for ACDF. This study demonstrates GPT-4's ability to elevate patient education by providing high-quality, diverse information tailored to those with advanced literacy levels. As AI technology evolves, refining these tools for accuracy and user-friendliness remains crucial, catering to patients' varying literacy levels and information needs in spine surgery.

From technical to understandable: Artificial Intelligence Large Language Models improve the readability of knee radiology reports.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an Artificial Intelligence-Large Language Model (AI-LLM) at improving the readability of knee radiology reports. Reports of 100 knee X-rays, 100 knee computed tomography (CT) scans and 100 knee magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were retrieved. The following prompt command was inserted into the AI-LLM: 'Explain this radiology report to a patient in layman's terms in the second person:[Report Text]'. The Flesch-Kincaid reading level (FKRL) score, Flesch reading ease (FRE) score and report length were calculated for the original radiology report and the AI-LLM generated report. Any 'hallucination' or inaccurate text produced by the AI-LLM-generated report was documented. Statistically significant improvements in mean FKRL scores in the AI-LLM generated X-ray report (12.7 ± 1.0-7.2 ± 0.6), CT report (13.4 ± 1.0-7.5 ± 0.5) and MRI report (13.5 ± 0.9-7.5 ± 0.6) were observed. Statistically significant improvements in mean FRE scores in the AI-LLM generated X-ray report (39.5 ± 7.5-76.8 ± 5.1), CT report (27.3 ± 5.9-73.1 ± 5.6) and MRI report (26.8 ± 6.4-73.4 ± 5.0) were observed. Superior FKRL scores and FRE scores were observed in the AI-LLM-generated X-ray report compared to the AI-LLM-generated CT report and MRI report, p < 0.001. The hallucination rates in the AI-LLM generated X-ray report, CT report and MRI report were 2%, 5% and 5%, respectively. This study highlights the promising use of AI-LLMs as an innovative, patient-centred strategy to improve the readability of knee radiology reports. The clinical relevance of this study is that an AI-LLM-generated knee radiology report may enhance patients' understanding of their imaging reports, potentially reducing the responder burden placed on the ordering physicians. However, due to the 'hallucinations' produced by the AI-LLM-generated report, the ordering physician must always engage in a collaborative discussion with the patient regarding both reports and the corresponding images. Level IV.

Dr. Google to Dr. ChatGPT: assessing the content and quality of artificial intelligence-generated medical information on appendicitis

IntroductionGenerative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have recently been posited as potential sources of online medical information for patients making medical decisions. Existing online patient-oriented medical information has repeatedly been shown to be of variable quality and difficult readability. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the content and quality of AI-generated medical information on acute appendicitis.MethodsA modified DISCERN assessment tool, comprising 16 distinct criteria each scored on a 5-point Likert scale (score range 16–80), was used to assess AI-generated content. Readability was determined using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) scores. Four popular chatbots, ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4, Bard, and Claude-2, were prompted to generate medical information about appendicitis. Three investigators independently scored the generated texts blinded to the identity of the AI platforms.ResultsChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Bard, and Claude-2 had overall mean (SD) quality scores of 60.7 (1.2), 62.0 (1.0), 62.3 (1.2), and 51.3 (2.3), respectively, on a scale of 16–80. Inter-rater reliability was 0.81, 0.75, 0.81, and 0.72, respectively, indicating substantial agreement. Claude-2 demonstrated a significantly lower mean quality score compared to ChatGPT-4 (p = 0.001), ChatGPT-3.5 (p = 0.005), and Bard (p = 0.001). Bard was the only AI platform that listed verifiable sources, while Claude-2 provided fabricated sources. All chatbots except for Claude-2 advised readers to consult a physician if experiencing symptoms. Regarding readability, FKGL and FRE scores of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Bard, and Claude-2 were 14.6 and 23.8, 11.9 and 33.9, 8.6 and 52.8, 11.0 and 36.6, respectively, indicating difficulty readability at a college reading skill level.ConclusionAI-generated medical information on appendicitis scored favorably upon quality assessment, but most either fabricated sources or did not provide any altogether. Additionally, overall readability far exceeded recommended levels for the public. Generative AI platforms demonstrate measured potential for patient education and engagement about appendicitis.

An Assessment of the Arabic-Language Informational Resources Available to Colon Cancer Patients Online

Background: The internet has become a primary source of health information, particularly for cancer patients. This study evaluated the quality of online health information related to colon cancer in Arabic. Objective: To assess the reliability, accountability, legitimacy, and readability of Arabic websites providing information on colon cancer. Methods: A search was conducted on major search engines using Arabic keywords related to colon cancer. After initial screening, 13 websites were selected for evaluation. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, DISCERN instrument and website certification (Health on the Net - HON code) were used for assessment. Readability was analyzed using the Flesch Reading Ease Score and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Results: Non-government websites, particularly Wikipedia, msdmanuals.com, and primomedico.com, demonstrated higher compliance with JAMA benchmarks. Six websites scored high on the DISCERN instrument, indicating reliable treatment information. Only one website was HON-code certified. Readability analysis revealed that text comprehension is challenging for most websites. Conclusion: Private agencies and hospitals managed non-government websites generally outperformed government websites' reliability, quality, and readability. However, overall improvement in Arabic's online health information landscape is essential to enhance accessibility and credibility for colon cancer patients

ChatGPT as a Source of Patient Information for Lumbar Spinal Fusion and Laminectomy: A Comparative Analysis Against Google Web Search.

Retrospective Observational Study. The objective of this study was to assess the utility of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot, in providing patient information for lumbar spinal fusion and lumbar laminectomy in comparison with the Google search engine. ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot with seemingly unlimited functionality, may present an alternative to a Google web search for patients seeking information about medical questions. With widespread misinformation and suboptimal quality of online health information, it is imperative to assess ChatGPT as a resource for this purpose. The first 10 frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to the search terms "lumbar spinal fusion" and "lumbar laminectomy" were extracted from Google and ChatGPT. Responses to shared questions were compared regarding length and readability, using the Flesch Reading Ease score and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Numerical FAQs from Google were replicated in ChatGPT. Two of 10 (20%) questions for both lumbar spinal fusion and lumbar laminectomy were asked similarly between ChatGPT and Google. Compared with Google, ChatGPT's responses were lengthier (340.0 vs. 159.3 words) and of lower readability (Flesch Reading Ease score: 34.0 vs. 58.2; Flesch-Kincaid grade level: 11.6 vs. 8.8). Subjectively, we evaluated these responses to be accurate and adequately nonspecific. Each response concluded with a recommendation to discuss further with a health care provider. Over half of the numerical questions from Google produced a varying or nonnumerical response in ChatGPT. FAQs and responses regarding lumbar spinal fusion and lumbar laminectomy were highly variable between Google and ChatGPT. While ChatGPT may be able to produce relatively accurate responses in select questions, its role remains as a supplement or starting point to a consultation with a physician, not as a replacement, and should be taken with caution until its functionality can be validated.

Online Resources for Robin Sequence; an Analysis of Readability.

The objective was to evaluate the readability of easily accessible parent-directed information concerning Robin Sequence (RS) online, compared to the American Medical Association (AMA)-recommended sixth grade (age 11-12) readability level. A Google search of the term “Pierre Robin Sequence information” was performed. The first ten websites were evaluated using six commonly used readability formulas. Sample texts from three websites were ‘translated’ by the authors, with the aim of achieving a sixth grade readability level. The following outcomes were used: Automated Readability Index (ARI), Coleman Liau Index (CLI), Gunning Fog Score, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score. The mean pooled grade level of the top 10 included websites was 12.1 (age 17-18). The overall FRE Index was 45.8, which is equivalent to a College-grade reading level. The mean grade level by each test used was: Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 11.6 (age 16-17), Gunning Fog Score 13.3 (age 18+), SMOG 10.0 (age 14-15), Coleman-Liau Index 13.8 (age 18+), and ARI 12.0 (age 17-18). The author-translated resources achieved pooled mean grade levels of 6.3-6.5. Parent-directed online materials concerning RS have a readability in excess of the AMA-recommended sixth grade reading level. Even though the condition is complex, more readable resources are achievable. Coproduction of parent-directed resources in association with public an patient involvement (PPI) contributors is encouraged.

Usefulness and Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Responses to Patient Questions for Neurosurgical Procedures.

The Internet has become a primary source of health information, leading patients to seek answers online before consulting health care providers. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) in neurosurgery by assessing the accuracy and helpfulness of artificial intelligence (AI)-generated responses to common postsurgical questions. A list of 60 commonly asked questions regarding neurosurgical procedures was developed. ChatGPT-3.0, ChatGPT-3.5, and ChatGPT-4.0 responses to these questions were recorded and graded by numerous practitioners for accuracy and helpfulness. The understandability and actionability of the answers were assessed using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool. Readability analysis was conducted using established scales. A total of 1080 responses were evaluated, equally divided among ChatGPT-3.0, 3.5, and 4.0, each contributing 360 responses. The mean helpfulness score across the 3 subsections was 3.511 ± 0.647 while the accuracy score was 4.165 ± 0.567. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool analysis revealed that the AI-generated responses had higher actionability scores than understandability. This indicates that the answers provided practical guidance and recommendations that patients could apply effectively. On the other hand, the mean Flesch Reading Ease score was 33.5, suggesting that the readability level of the responses was relatively complex. The Raygor Readability Estimate scores ranged within the graduate level, with an average score of the 15th grade. The artificial intelligence chatbot's responses, although factually accurate, were not rated highly beneficial, with only marginal differences in perceived helpfulness and accuracy between ChatGPT-3.0 and ChatGPT-3.5 versions. Despite this, the responses from ChatGPT-4.0 showed a notable improvement in understandability, indicating enhanced readability over earlier versions.

Readability of postoperative discharge instructions is associated with complication rate in companion animals undergoing sterilisation.

Readability of client communications is a commonly overlooked topic in veterinary medical education. In human medicine, it has been advised that the readability of patient materials should be at USA schooling sixth-grade level or below. We hypothesised that student written discharge instructions would be of an inappropriate readability level, and discharges scored with higher reading grade levels would be associated with more complications. The cohort comprised 149 dogs and cats presenting for sterilisation. The readability of discharge instructions was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) formulas. Records were examined for evidence of postoperative complications. The mean FRE score of the discharge instructions was 61.97, with 30.87% being classified as 'difficult' or 'fairly difficult', 60.4% as 'standard' and 8.72% as 'fairly easy'. The mean FKGL was 8.64, with 98% being above reading level 6. Overall, there was an association between FKGL and complication occurrence (p = 0.005). Stratification by species demonstrated FRE and FKGL to be associated with complication occurrence in dogs (FRE score, p = 0.038; FKGL, p = 0.002), but not cats (FRE score, p = 0.964; FKGL, p = 0.679). Due to the retrospective nature of the study, there were difficulties associated with extracting relevant complication information from the medical records. Only 2% of owner-directed discharge instructions were written at readability levels aligning with the recommendations set forth in the human guidelines.

Artificial Intelligence Language Model Performance for Rapid Intraoperative Queries in Plastic Surgery: ChatGPT and the Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence in healthcare has led to the development of large language models that can address various medical queries, including intraoperatively. This study investigates the potential of ChatGPT in addressing intraoperative questions during the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap procedure. Methods: A series of six intraoperative questions specific to the DIEP flap procedure, derived from real-world clinical scenarios, were proposed to ChatGPT. A panel of four experienced board-certified plastic surgeons evaluated ChatGPT’s performance in providing accurate, relevant, and comprehensible responses. Results: The Likert scale demonstrated to be medically accurate, systematic in presentation, and logical when providing alternative solutions. The mean readability score of the Flesch Reading Ease Score was 28.7 (±0.8), the Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level was 12.4 (±0.5), and the Coleman–Liau Index was 14.5 (±0.5). Suitability-wise, the DISCERN score of ChatGPT was 48 (±2.5) indicating suitable and comprehensible language for experts. Conclusions: Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT can serve as a supplementary tool for surgeons to offer valuable insights and foster intraoperative problem-solving abilities. However, it lacks consideration of individual patient factors and surgical nuances. Nevertheless, further refinement of its training data and rigorous scrutiny under experts to ensure the accuracy and up-to-date nature of the information holds the potential for it to be utilized in the surgical field.