Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a potential tool in postoperative care, particularly for complex procedures like Endoscopic Transnasal Skull Base Surgery (ETSBS), where patient comprehension of recovery instructions is critical. This study aimed to compare the readability, understandability, and actionability of postoperative instructions generated by three AI platforms (ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Gemini).</p> Methods <p>Each platform was prompted to create ETSBS postoperative instructions. Readability was assessed using Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Reading Ease (FKRE). The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for printable materials (PEMAT-P) was used to evaluate understandability and actionability. Two outputs per platform were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were conducted using Kruskal-Wallis tests and Pearson correlation coefficients.</p> Results <p>Gemini had the highest FKRE score (52.18), followed by DeepSeek (46.46) and ChatGPT (39.85), though differences were not significant (<i>p</i> = 0.458). FKGL was lowest in Gemini (9.07), compared to DeepSeek (9.82) and ChatGPT (10.87) (<i>p</i> = 0.469). Understandability scores were highest in ChatGPT and DeepSeek (76.45%), while Gemini scored lower (63.30%, <i>p</i> = 0.005). ChatGPT showed the highest actionability (58.5%), followed by DeepSeek (51.0%) and Gemini (45.15%), with no significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.645). A strong inverse correlation was found between FKRE and FKGL (<i>r</i> = -0.998, <i>p</i> = 0.000). Correlations with understandability and actionability were moderate and non-significant (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.1).</p> Conclusion <p>While AI platforms generated similarly readable content, significant differences emerged in usability. None met optimal standards for patient education, highlighting the need for clinician review before clinical application.</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

Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence platforms in generating Post-Operative instructions for endoscopic transnasal skull base surgery

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月17日

查看全文
  • Ahlam H. Alamri,
  • Alya AlZabin,
  • Nasir Magboul,
  • Abdulaziz S. Alrasheed,
  • Ghassan Alokby,
  • Ahmad Alroqi

摘要

Purpose

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a potential tool in postoperative care, particularly for complex procedures like Endoscopic Transnasal Skull Base Surgery (ETSBS), where patient comprehension of recovery instructions is critical. This study aimed to compare the readability, understandability, and actionability of postoperative instructions generated by three AI platforms (ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Gemini).

Methods

Each platform was prompted to create ETSBS postoperative instructions. Readability was assessed using Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Reading Ease (FKRE). The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool for printable materials (PEMAT-P) was used to evaluate understandability and actionability. Two outputs per platform were analyzed. Statistical comparisons were conducted using Kruskal-Wallis tests and Pearson correlation coefficients.

Results

Gemini had the highest FKRE score (52.18), followed by DeepSeek (46.46) and ChatGPT (39.85), though differences were not significant (p = 0.458). FKGL was lowest in Gemini (9.07), compared to DeepSeek (9.82) and ChatGPT (10.87) (p = 0.469). Understandability scores were highest in ChatGPT and DeepSeek (76.45%), while Gemini scored lower (63.30%, p = 0.005). ChatGPT showed the highest actionability (58.5%), followed by DeepSeek (51.0%) and Gemini (45.15%), with no significant difference (p = 0.645). A strong inverse correlation was found between FKRE and FKGL (r = -0.998, p = 0.000). Correlations with understandability and actionability were moderate and non-significant (p > 0.1).

Conclusion

While AI platforms generated similarly readable content, significant differences emerged in usability. None met optimal standards for patient education, highlighting the need for clinician review before clinical application.