Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41954673›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026

The Impact of Specific Prompt Engineering Techniques on the Readability of LLM-Generated Patient Materials in Gastroenterology and Hepatology.

Husayn F Ramji, Aishwarya Gatiganti, Anveet Janwadkar, Jacob Lampenfeld, Ilaria M Simeone, Abhijith Atkuru, Jason Mathias, Stephanie Mrowczynski, Sharan Poonja, Chandler Gilliard and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors.

Husayn F RamjiJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Aishwarya GatigantiJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Anveet JanwadkarJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Jacob LampenfeldJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Ilaria M SimeoneJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Abhijith AtkuruJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Jason MathiasJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Stephanie MrowczynskiJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Sharan PoonjaJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Chandler GilliardJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Shaquille LewisJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Pooja ArumugamJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Clara FreedmanJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Luis MoralesJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Everette MartinJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Larry ZhouJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Corinne ZalomekJohn Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Devika DixitGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Saba AbdulsadaGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Matthew HouleGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Matthew AliasGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Molly DelkGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Sarah C GloverGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Peng-Sheng TingGastroenterology and Hepatology, John Deming Department of Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA. pting1@tulane.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsHealth literacy significantly impacts patient outcomes. While the average American reads at an 8th grade reading level, healthcare materials are often written above this, potentially contributing to our nation's health literacy gap. Large language models (LLM) and prompt engineering may be able to help address this gap by consistently generating materials at the recommended 6th grade reading level. Our study aims to assess how different prompting techniques affect the readability of LLM-generated materials.

methodsWe assessed the effects of five prompt techniques (Zero-Shot, Contextualized, Constrained, Meta, Persona) on the readability of LLM-generated explanations for fifteen common gastroenterology and hepatology conditions across twelve LLMs. Output (n = 2655) readability was assessed with two readability metrics (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL)), followed by significance testing and post-hoc analysis.

resultsNo prompt technique or model consistently produced outputs at or below a 6th grade reading level when assessed by the SMOG index, the preferred metric when assessing healthcare materials (p < 0.001). However, prompts with less constraints yield less readable outputs, while prompts with more constraints yield significantly more readable outputs (p < 0.001).

conclusionsThis study demonstrates the potential of LLMs as a tool in addressing America's health literacy gap, as we show prompt engineering affects the readability of gastroenterology and hepatology-related explanations. We also found limitations to this technique. Further optimization is necessary before LLMs can consistently generate patient materials without appropriate clinician oversight, but it implies prompt engineering as a tool in addressing our nation's health literacy gap.

Indexed as

ComprehensionGastroenterologyHealth LiteracyLarge Language ModelsPatient Education as TopicHumansArtificial intelligenceHealth literacyLLMsPatient education materialsPrompt engineering

Identifiers

PMID41954673
PMCPMC13522015

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.