Readability, understandability, and quality of online education materials and large language models for retrograde cricopharyngeal muscle dysfunction
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, cilt.282, sa.9, ss.4711-4720, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 282 Sayı: 9
- Basım Tarihi: 2025
- Doi Numarası: 10.1007/s00405-025-09628-x
- Dergi Adı: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.4711-4720
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Artificial intelligence, Deglutition disorders, Health literacy, Patient education, Readability
- Marmara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
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.