Skip to content
Open access

Quality, Readability, and Content Deficiencies of Three Large Language Models in Bee Sting Health Information: A Comparative Evaluation with Patient Perspectives

Oct 2026 · medRxiv · 0 citations
Medicine

TL;DR

The three LLMs exhibited distinct strengths: DeepSeek in source reliability, ChatGPT in overall quality, and Doubao in understandability in answering frequently asked questions about bee stings.

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the information quality, reliability, readability, and content deficits of ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Doubao in answering frequently asked questions about bee stings. Methods Twenty-five high-frequency patient questions were selected based on Google Trends, domestic health platforms, and allergy guidelines, and submitted to the three LLMs, yielding 75 responses. Two emergency physicians independently assessed quality using GQS, mDISCERN, QAMAI, EQIP, and PEMAT-U/A. Readability was evaluated using six indices (ARI, FRES, GFI, FKGL, CLI, SMOG). Content deficits were classified qualitatively. Twenty emergency department patients evaluated the comprehensibility and credibility of AI responses. Results Significant differences were found among the three models on all quality metrics (all P < 0.01). DeepSeek achieved the highest mDISCERN score (median 21.00); ChatGPT led on QAMAI (25.00) and EQIP (75.00%); Doubao ranked lowest on all quality indicators but highest on PEMAT-U (73.00%). No model met the sixth-grade reading level standard. Eleven content deficits were identified: outdated medical advice (45.45%), omissions (36.36%), and hallucinations (18.18%). Doubao received the highest patient preference (45.0%). Conclusion The three LLMs exhibited distinct strengths: DeepSeek in source reliability, ChatGPT in overall quality, and Doubao in understandability. All models had excessively high readability levels, and outdated medical advice was the predominant content deficit. Objective To evaluate the information quality, reliability, readability, and content deficits of ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Doubao in answering frequently asked questions about bee stings. Methods Twenty-five high-frequency patient questions were selected based on Google Trends, domestic health platforms, and allergy guidelines, and submitted to the three LLMs, yielding 75 responses. Two emergency physicians independently assessed quality using GQS, mDISCERN, QAMAI, EQIP, and PEMAT-U/A. Readability was evaluated using six indices (ARI, FRES, GFI, FKGL, CLI, SMOG). Content deficits were classified qualitatively. Twenty emergency department patients evaluated the comprehensibility and credibility of AI responses. Results Significant differences were found among the three models on all quality metrics (all P < 0.01). DeepSeek achieved the highest mDISCERN score (median 21.00); ChatGPT led on QAMAI (25.00) and EQIP (75.00%); Doubao ranked lowest on all quality indicators but highest on PEMAT-U (73.00%). No model met the sixth-grade reading level standard. Eleven content deficits were identified: outdated medical advice (45.45%), omissions (36.36%), and hallucinations (18.18%). Doubao received the highest patient preference (45.0%). Conclusion The three LLMs exhibited distinct strengths: DeepSeek in source reliability, ChatGPT in overall quality, and Doubao in understandability. All models had excessively high readability levels, and outdated medical advice was the predominant content deficit.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Oct 2026

Comparative evaluation of large language models for esophageal cancer patient education: quality, reliability, readability, understandability, and actionability

Background Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as sources of health information. This study evaluated the quality, reliability, readability, understandability, and actionability of responses generated by three mainstream LLMs to esophageal cancer-related questions. Methods Thirty esophageal cancer-relate...

Ying-Ying Hang, Rui-Quan Yuan, Man Lu et al. · 0 citations
Oct 2026

Evaluation of the reliability, quality, and readability of multiple large language model responses (ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot) on silicosis.

BackgroundInadequate or misleading health information about silicosis can delay diagnosis, reporting, and exposure removal, potentially affecting risk communication and timely occupational health interventions.ObjectiveThis study evaluates the reliability, quality, and readability of Large Language Models (LLMs) includ...

Nejdiye Güngördü, Seher Kurtul, Büşra Albayrak · 0 citations
Open access Oct 2026

Comparative quality, readability, and factual reliability of four publicly accessible chatbot systems for heart failure patient education: a cross-sectional evaluation

Background Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for health information delivery, but comparative evidence on their quality, readability, and factual reliability in heart failure (HF) education remains limited. Objective To compare four publicly accessible chatbot systems under prespecified access and retr...

Na-Na Qin, Xin-Ran Shao, Jing Wang et al. · 0 citations
Open access Oct 2026

Generative AI chatbots as sources of phimosis-related consumer health information: a cross-sectional comparison of quality, source transparency, and readability

Background Publicly accessible generative artificial intelligence chatbot products are increasingly used for sensitive health questions, but the quality, source transparency, and readability of phimosis-related information remain uncertain. Methods We conducted an internet-based cross-sectional comparative study on 1 J...

Qing-Hua Luo, Lei-Hua Cao, Pan Ding · 0 citations
Review Open access Oct 2026

Information quality, understandability, actionability and readability of large language models for HIV health education: A cross-platform evaluation.

OBJECTIVES Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate health education materials, but their suitability for patient-facing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) education remains insufficiently evaluated. We assessed the information quality, understandability, actionability, readability, text structure...

Meng-Qiu Hu, Zhi-Qiang Wang, Jing-Lan Zhang et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Oct 2026

Assessing the Reliability, Quality, and Readability of ChatGPT-Generated HPV Vaccination Responses

Abstract Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) causes cervical and oropharyngeal cancers. Despite vaccine availability, vaccination rates remain suboptimal due to misinformation and safety concerns. As people increasingly seek health information from AI tools such as ChatGPT, evaluating the reliability, quality, and re...

L. Y. Meğreli, M. A. Yaş · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.