Scholarlink

Objective <p>This study aims to evaluate online patient education materials on retrograde cricopharyngeal dysfunction (RCPD) by comparing the readability, understandability, and quality of content generated by large language models (LLM).</p> Method <p>A web search in December 2024 evaluated 51 online resources and four LLMs (ChatGPT 4.0, Gemini 1.5 Flash, Perplexity GPT-3.5, DeepSeek-V2.5). Readability was analyzed using Readable.io, understandability actionability was assessed using PEMAT, and information quality was assessed using DISCERN.</p> Results <p>The average readability level of the online material and the LLM responses was at the 11th-12th grade level. The Flesch Reading Ease score was lowest for the LLMs, especially for the DeepSeek-V2.5 model (24.21). While PEMAT understandability scores were adequate for online (82%) and LLMs (79%), actionability was low across all groups (25–37%). DISCERN analyses showed that both sources of information were of limited quality in supporting treatment decisions.</p> Conclusion <p>This study revealed that both online and LLM-generated materials on RCPD exceeded the recommended readability levels. Although the materials demonstrated acceptable understandability, they exhibited low actionability and inadequate overall quality, emphasizing the need for more patient-centered digital health communication.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Readability, understandability, and quality of online education materials and large language models for retrograde cricopharyngeal muscle dysfunction

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月13日

查看全文
  • Nurullah Türe,
  • Emel Tahir,
  • Necati Enver

摘要

Objective

This study aims to evaluate online patient education materials on retrograde cricopharyngeal dysfunction (RCPD) by comparing the readability, understandability, and quality of content generated by large language models (LLM).

Method

A web search in December 2024 evaluated 51 online resources and four LLMs (ChatGPT 4.0, Gemini 1.5 Flash, Perplexity GPT-3.5, DeepSeek-V2.5). Readability was analyzed using Readable.io, understandability actionability was assessed using PEMAT, and information quality was assessed using DISCERN.

Results

The average readability level of the online material and the LLM responses was at the 11th-12th grade level. The Flesch Reading Ease score was lowest for the LLMs, especially for the DeepSeek-V2.5 model (24.21). While PEMAT understandability scores were adequate for online (82%) and LLMs (79%), actionability was low across all groups (25–37%). DISCERN analyses showed that both sources of information were of limited quality in supporting treatment decisions.

Conclusion

This study revealed that both online and LLM-generated materials on RCPD exceeded the recommended readability levels. Although the materials demonstrated acceptable understandability, they exhibited low actionability and inadequate overall quality, emphasizing the need for more patient-centered digital health communication.