Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human versus artificial intelligence comparison of resources and quality measurements - A benchmarking study from European association of urology (EAU) endourology.

IF 0.9 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Urology Annals Pub Date : 2026-07-01 Epub Date: 2026-07-13 DOI:10.4103/ua.ua_42_26
Ravanth Baskaran, Omar Al-Gholmy, Wissam Kamal, Carlotta Nedbal, Frederic Panthier, Olivier Traxer, Naeem Bhojani, Joe Philip, Bhaskar K Somani
{"title":"Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human versus artificial intelligence comparison of resources and quality measurements - A benchmarking study from European association of urology (EAU) endourology.","authors":"Ravanth Baskaran, Omar Al-Gholmy, Wissam Kamal, Carlotta Nedbal, Frederic Panthier, Olivier Traxer, Naeem Bhojani, Joe Philip, Bhaskar K Somani","doi":"10.4103/ua.ua_42_26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is a noninvasive method for removing stones, primarily used for small, uncomplicated urinary stones, as the number of kidney stone cases continues to rise. With rising patient numbers, online information must be accurate and easy to understand. We assessed the quality and readability of SWL information available online and compared it with leaflets created by generative artificial intelligence (AI). The top 20 search results for four SWL-related terms on Google, Yahoo, and Bing were collected and duplicates removed. Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek generated a patient leaflet. Two authors evaluated quality using DISCERN and JAMA scores and readability using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). Later, ChatGPT reviewed the AI-generated information with DISCERN. A total of 68 websites were included. The quality assessments showed average websites with AI-leaflet DISCERN scores of 52.4 (±8.91) and 58.7 (±5.03), JAMA Benchmark scores of 2.22 (±1.10) and 0, FRES of 52.1 (±13.8) and 51.5 (±8.05), and FKGL scores of 9.04 (±2.36) and 8.93 (±1.10). No significant differences were seen in DISCERN (<i>P</i> = 0.224), FRES (<i>P</i> = 0.652), and FKGL (<i>P</i> = 0.866), but differences in JAMA scores were significant (<i>P</i> = 0.0010). A difference was also noted in the author-rated and the AI-rated DISCERN scores. There is a deficiency in high-quality SWL information that meets global readability standards. As more individuals use GAI-resources trained on online data, it is crucial to improve their quality for patients and carers. Doing so enables them to make informed decisions and promotes their well-being during treatment, resulting in improved comfort and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23633,"journal":{"name":"Urology Annals","volume":"18 3","pages":"215-224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13441066/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology Annals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ua.ua_42_26","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is a noninvasive method for removing stones, primarily used for small, uncomplicated urinary stones, as the number of kidney stone cases continues to rise. With rising patient numbers, online information must be accurate and easy to understand. We assessed the quality and readability of SWL information available online and compared it with leaflets created by generative artificial intelligence (AI). The top 20 search results for four SWL-related terms on Google, Yahoo, and Bing were collected and duplicates removed. Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek generated a patient leaflet. Two authors evaluated quality using DISCERN and JAMA scores and readability using Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL). Later, ChatGPT reviewed the AI-generated information with DISCERN. A total of 68 websites were included. The quality assessments showed average websites with AI-leaflet DISCERN scores of 52.4 (±8.91) and 58.7 (±5.03), JAMA Benchmark scores of 2.22 (±1.10) and 0, FRES of 52.1 (±13.8) and 51.5 (±8.05), and FKGL scores of 9.04 (±2.36) and 8.93 (±1.10). No significant differences were seen in DISCERN (P = 0.224), FRES (P = 0.652), and FKGL (P = 0.866), but differences in JAMA scores were significant (P = 0.0010). A difference was also noted in the author-rated and the AI-rated DISCERN scores. There is a deficiency in high-quality SWL information that meets global readability standards. As more individuals use GAI-resources trained on online data, it is crucial to improve their quality for patients and carers. Doing so enables them to make informed decisions and promotes their well-being during treatment, resulting in improved comfort and outcomes.

评估冲击波碎石患者信息的质量和可读性:人类与人工智能资源和质量测量的比较——欧洲泌尿外科协会(EAU)的一项基准研究。
冲击波碎石术(SWL)是一种非侵入性的结石清除方法,主要用于小的、简单的尿路结石,因为肾结石病例的数量不断增加。随着患者人数的增加,在线信息必须准确且易于理解。我们评估了在线SWL信息的质量和可读性,并将其与生成式人工智能(AI)制作的传单进行了比较。我们收集了bb0、雅虎和必应上四个swl相关词条的前20个搜索结果,并删除了重复的搜索结果。ChatGPT、Gemini和DeepSeek等生成式人工智能(GAI)平台生成了患者传单。两位作者使用DISCERN和JAMA评分评估质量,使用Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES)和Flesch- kincaid Grade Level (FKGL)评估可读性。随后,ChatGPT与DISCERN一起审查了人工智能生成的信息。共纳入68个网站。质量评价结果显示,网站ai - leafdiscern得分分别为52.4(±8.91)和58.7(±5.03),JAMA Benchmark得分分别为2.22(±1.10)和0,FRES得分分别为52.1(±13.8)和51.5(±8.05),FKGL得分分别为9.04(±2.36)和8.93(±1.10)。两组在DISCERN评分(P = 0.224)、FRES评分(P = 0.652)、FKGL评分(P = 0.866)上差异无统计学意义,但JAMA评分差异有统计学意义(P = 0.0010)。作者评分和人工智能评分的DISCERN得分也存在差异。在满足全球可读性标准的高质量SWL信息方面存在不足。随着越来越多的人使用经过在线数据培训的人工智能资源,提高其对患者和护理人员的质量至关重要。这样做使他们能够做出明智的决定,并在治疗期间促进他们的福祉,从而改善舒适度和结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Urology Annals
Urology Annals UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
审稿时长
31 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书