Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42690359›Full record

ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2026

Quality, readability, and patient safety of ChatGPT-generated responses to fall-related questions in older adults: a multidisciplinary evaluation.

Merve Arı, Nursen İlçin, Hatice Yağcıoğlu, İlyas Akkar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 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

4 authors.

Merve ArıKTO Karatay University, Vocational School of Health Services, Department of Medical Services and Techniques, Medical Imaging Techniques Program - Konya, Türkiye.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5331-7907
Nursen İlçinDokuz Eylul University, Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Division of Geriatric Physiotherapy - İzmir, Türkiye.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0174-8224
Hatice YağcıoğluPamukkale University, Graduate School of Health Sciences, Department of Anatomy - Denizli, Türkiye.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-7985-9267
İlyas AkkarUniversity of Health Sciences, Konya City Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Geriatrics - Konya, Türkiye.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7658-831X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveOlder adults increasingly use artificial intelligence-based tools to obtain health information. Although artificial intelligence chatbots such as ChatGPT may enhance access, the quality, readability, and patient safety of fall-prevention information remain uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the quality, readability, and patient safety implications of ChatGPT-generated responses to common questions about fall risk and home safety in older adults.

methodsTen frequently asked fall-related questions were submitted to ChatGPT (version 5.2). Responses were independently assessed by a multidisciplinary panel including physiotherapists, a geriatrician, a physical medicine and rehabilitation physician, an occupational therapist, and an orthopedic specialist. Quality was evaluated using the Mika classification. Readability was measured with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. Interrater reliability was analyzed using a two-way random-effects intraclass correlation coefficient model with absolute agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient [2,k]).

resultsThree responses were rated as "excellent," while seven responses were rated as "satisfactory requiring minimal clarification." No response received a rating corresponding to "moderately satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory." The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level was 8.4 (range 4.3-11.9). Five responses exceeded the readability levels commonly recommended for patient education materials. Interrater reliability demonstrated fair agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient [2,k]=0.72; 95%CI 0.64-0.80).

conclusionWhile ChatGPT provided generally acceptable clinical information, variability in readability and expert ratings raises patient safety concerns. AI-generated health content should be reviewed and tailored to older adults' health literacy needs before clinical use.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsComprehensionPatient SafetyAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHealth LiteracyHumansReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID42690359
PMCPMC13506134

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.