Skip to content
Review Open access

Evaluating the reliability, quality, and readability of AI-generated patient education on hallux valgus: a comparative study of large language models

Jul 2026 · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 0 citations

Abstract

Patients with hallux valgus increasingly seek health information through consumer-facing artificial intelligence (AI)–driven patient education tools, particularly large language model–based conversational agents. Although these tools offer rapid and accessible responses, concerns remain regarding the reliability, usefulness, overall quality, and readability of AI-generated patient education materials. Evidence specifically evaluating AI-generated patient education for hallux valgus, a condition strongly influenced by patient expectations and treatment preferences, remains limited. This cross-sectional comparative study evaluated the performance of three large language models—ChatGPT-4o, Gemini-2.5-Flash, and DeepSeek-V3—in responding to 20 patient-centered questions related to hallux valgus. Questions were developed using AI-assisted question generation and publicly available Google Trends search patterns and categorized into four clinical domains. AI-generated responses were anonymized and independently assessed by three orthopaedic surgeons for reliability, usefulness, and overall quality using 7-point Likert-based reliability and usefulness scales and the Global Quality Scale (GQS). Readability was analyzed using six standardized indices. Inter-rater agreement and between-model comparisons were statistically evaluated. Gemini-2.5-Flash demonstrated modestly higher overall reliability, particularly in questions related to etiology and clinical presentation. DeepSeek-V3 achieved higher usefulness scores in the long-term outcomes and quality-of-life domain and produced significantly more readable content, as reflected by higher Flesch Reading Ease scores and lower grade-level indices. In contrast, Gemini-2.5-Flash generated linguistically more complex responses requiring higher educational levels for comprehension. Overall usefulness and global quality scores did not differ significantly among models. Qualitative review also identified occasional examples of oversimplified or potentially misleading information. Despite these differences, several readability metrics exceeded recommended patient health-literacy thresholds. Contemporary AI-based conversational agents can provide patient-oriented information regarding hallux valgus with variable reliability and readability characteristics, although statistically significant differences were observed across models. A trade-off between factual accuracy and linguistic accessibility was observed. AI tools should therefore be regarded as adjuncts to, rather than replacements for, clinician-led patient education. Awareness of AI limitations and appropriate clinical guidance remain essential to ensure safe, accurate, and patient-centered information delivery. Not applicable.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Aug 2026

Evaluating large language models in patient education: a comparative analysis addressing frequently asked questions in peri-acetabular osteotomy.

There may be significant differences in how effectively LLMs support patients with surgical queries, particularly in areas needing detailed explanation, and usually required minimal clarification in areas needing detailed explanation.

T. Davis, B. Guevel, K. Logishetty et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Quality and readability of AI Chatbot responses to frequently asked questions from patients undergoing progressive collapsing foot deformity surgery: a comparative study of ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Gemini.

AI chatbots produce generally accurate baseline information on PCFD surgery, with Perplexity showing significantly higher expert-rated accuracy and clarity than the other platforms-contrary to the hypothesis of comparable accuracy-while readability remains uniformly inadequate for all platforms, as hypothesized.

L. Micicoi, J. Brué, Saumith Menon et al. · 0 citations
Aug 2026

Quality of AI-Generated Patient Education for Pre- and Post-Operative Tracheostomy Care.

AI chatbots can generate accurate and comprehensive responses to common tracheostomy care questions, demonstrating potential to support patient education, but they continue to lack guaranteed, verifiable sourcing.

Keer Zhang, Lauran K. Evans, Desiree Delavary et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Comparing the readability of AI-generated and society-authored patient information leaflets in orthopaedics

AI-generated PILs offer brevity but do not consistently improve readability, with some indices suggesting increased complexity, and clinician oversight and further validation are essential to ensure AI-generated materials enhance, rather than hinder, patient understanding and engagement.

N. Kharma, S. Gill, Chayan Shanmugaratnam et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

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

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

Merve Arı, N. Ilçin, Hatice Yağcıoğlu et al. · 0 citations

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