ArticleThe world journal of men's health2026
Quality and Readability Analysis of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Medical Information Related to Prostate Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study of ChatGPT and DeepSeek.
Article in The world journal of men's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can ChatGPT Be Trusted for Urologic Patient Education? A Comparative Study of Stress Urinary Incontinence-Related Information From Versions 3.5 and 4.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Quality and Usability of Prostate Cancer Information Generated by Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: A Comparative Analysis.Cancers · 2026Article
- Challenges of using generative artificial intelligence for diabetes patient education: a cross-platform analysis of the quality, readability, and actionability of text generated by large language models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cross-platform evaluation of LLM-generated educational texts on cardiac myxoma: quality, readability, and actionability using network analysis and latent profile analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Challenges of using generative AI for patient education in chronic heart failure: an evaluation of content quality, readability, and actionability in cross-platform LLM-generated texts.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Performance evaluation of large language models in bladder cancer patient education Q&A: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Information quality, readability, and empathy of AI-generated public mental health information: a comparative evaluation of eight large language models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeArtificial intelligence (AI) tools have demonstrated considerable potential for the dissemination of medical information. However, variability may exist in the quality and readability of prostate-cancer-related content generated by different AI platforms. This study aimed to evaluate the quality, accuracy, and readability of prostate-cancer-related medical information produced by ChatGPT and DeepSeek. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrequently asked questions related to prostate cancer were collected from the American Cancer Society website, ChatGPT, and DeepSeek. Three urologists with over 10 years of clinical experience reviewed and confirmed the relevance of the selected questions. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for Printable Materials (PEMAT-P) was used to assess the understandability and actionability of AI-generated content. The DISCERN instrument was used to evaluate the quality of the treatment-related information. Additionally, readability was assessed using four established indices: Automated Readability Index (ARI), Flesch Reading Ease Score, Gunning Fog Index, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between ChatGPT and DeepSeek in PEMAT-P scores (70.66±8.13
conclusionsAI tools, such as ChatGPT and DeepSeek, hold significant potential for enhancing patient education and disseminating medical information on prostate cancer. Nevertheless, further refinement of content quality and language clarity is needed to prevent potential misunderstandings, decisional uncertainty, and anxiety among patients due to difficulty in comprehension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.