Victoria N Yi, Angel P Scialdone, Ann Marie Flusche, Kendall Reitz, Holly C Lewis, William M Tian, Elda Fisher, Kristen Rezak, Ash Patel
{"title":"比较大型语言模型作为健康素养工具:评估和简化性别确认手术的文本。","authors":"Victoria N Yi, Angel P Scialdone, Ann Marie Flusche, Kendall Reitz, Holly C Lewis, William M Tian, Elda Fisher, Kristen Rezak, Ash Patel","doi":"10.1080/10810730.2025.2547321","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient-facing materials in gender-affirming surgery are often written at a level higher than the NIH-recommended eighth grade reading level for patient education materials. In efforts to make patient resources more accessible, ChatGPT has successfully optimized linguistic content for patients seeking care in various medical fields. This study aims to evaluate and compare the ability of large language models (LLMs) to analyze readability and simplify online patient-facing resources for gender-affirming procedures. Google Incognito searches were performed on 15 terms relating to gender-affirming surgery. The first 20 text results were analyzed for reading level difficulty by an online readability calculator, Readability Scoring System v2.0 (RSS). Eight easily accessible LLMs were used to assess texts for readability and simplify texts to an eighth grade reading level, which were reevaluated by the RSS. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and one-way ANOVA tests were used for statistical analyses. Online resources were written with a mean reading grade level of 12.66 ± 2.54. Google Gemini was most successful at simplifying texts (8.39 ± 1.49), followed by Anthropic Claude (9.53 ± 1.85) and ChatGPT 4 (10.19 ± 1.83). LLMs had a greater margin of error when assessing readability of feminizing and facial procedures and when simplifying genital procedures (<i>p</i> < .017) Online texts on gender-affirming procedures are written with a readability more challenging than is recommended for patient-facing resources. Certain LLMs were better at simplifying texts than others. Providers should use caution when using LLMs for patient education in gender-affirming care, as they are prone to variability and bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":16026,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Large Language Models as Health Literacy Tools: Evaluating and Simplifying Texts on gender-Affirming Surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Victoria N Yi, Angel P Scialdone, Ann Marie Flusche, Kendall Reitz, Holly C Lewis, William M Tian, Elda Fisher, Kristen Rezak, Ash Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10810730.2025.2547321\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Patient-facing materials in gender-affirming surgery are often written at a level higher than the NIH-recommended eighth grade reading level for patient education materials. In efforts to make patient resources more accessible, ChatGPT has successfully optimized linguistic content for patients seeking care in various medical fields. This study aims to evaluate and compare the ability of large language models (LLMs) to analyze readability and simplify online patient-facing resources for gender-affirming procedures. Google Incognito searches were performed on 15 terms relating to gender-affirming surgery. The first 20 text results were analyzed for reading level difficulty by an online readability calculator, Readability Scoring System v2.0 (RSS). Eight easily accessible LLMs were used to assess texts for readability and simplify texts to an eighth grade reading level, which were reevaluated by the RSS. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and one-way ANOVA tests were used for statistical analyses. Online resources were written with a mean reading grade level of 12.66 ± 2.54. Google Gemini was most successful at simplifying texts (8.39 ± 1.49), followed by Anthropic Claude (9.53 ± 1.85) and ChatGPT 4 (10.19 ± 1.83). LLMs had a greater margin of error when assessing readability of feminizing and facial procedures and when simplifying genital procedures (<i>p</i> < .017) Online texts on gender-affirming procedures are written with a readability more challenging than is recommended for patient-facing resources. Certain LLMs were better at simplifying texts than others. Providers should use caution when using LLMs for patient education in gender-affirming care, as they are prone to variability and bias.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Communication\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2025.2547321\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2025.2547321","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing Large Language Models as Health Literacy Tools: Evaluating and Simplifying Texts on gender-Affirming Surgery.
Patient-facing materials in gender-affirming surgery are often written at a level higher than the NIH-recommended eighth grade reading level for patient education materials. In efforts to make patient resources more accessible, ChatGPT has successfully optimized linguistic content for patients seeking care in various medical fields. This study aims to evaluate and compare the ability of large language models (LLMs) to analyze readability and simplify online patient-facing resources for gender-affirming procedures. Google Incognito searches were performed on 15 terms relating to gender-affirming surgery. The first 20 text results were analyzed for reading level difficulty by an online readability calculator, Readability Scoring System v2.0 (RSS). Eight easily accessible LLMs were used to assess texts for readability and simplify texts to an eighth grade reading level, which were reevaluated by the RSS. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and one-way ANOVA tests were used for statistical analyses. Online resources were written with a mean reading grade level of 12.66 ± 2.54. Google Gemini was most successful at simplifying texts (8.39 ± 1.49), followed by Anthropic Claude (9.53 ± 1.85) and ChatGPT 4 (10.19 ± 1.83). LLMs had a greater margin of error when assessing readability of feminizing and facial procedures and when simplifying genital procedures (p < .017) Online texts on gender-affirming procedures are written with a readability more challenging than is recommended for patient-facing resources. Certain LLMs were better at simplifying texts than others. Providers should use caution when using LLMs for patient education in gender-affirming care, as they are prone to variability and bias.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Health Communication: International Perspectives is the leading journal covering the full breadth of a field that focuses on the communication of health information globally. Articles feature research on: • Developments in the field of health communication; • New media, m-health and interactive health communication; • Health Literacy; • Social marketing; • Global Health; • Shared decision making and ethics; • Interpersonal and mass media communication; • Advances in health diplomacy, psychology, government, policy and education; • Government, civil society and multi-stakeholder initiatives; • Public Private partnerships and • Public Health campaigns. Global in scope, the journal seeks to advance a synergistic relationship between research and practical information. With a focus on promoting the health literacy of the individual, caregiver, provider, community, and those in the health policy, the journal presents research, progress in areas of technology and public health, ethics, politics and policy, and the application of health communication principles. The journal is selective with the highest quality social scientific research including qualitative and quantitative studies.