Mengchu Zhao, Mi Zhou, Yexi Han, Xiaomei Song, Youbin Zhou, Haoning He
{"title":"评估人工智能生成的脊柱侧弯教材的可读性和质量:五种语言模型的比较分析。","authors":"Mengchu Zhao, Mi Zhou, Yexi Han, Xiaomei Song, Youbin Zhou, Haoning He","doi":"10.1038/s41598-025-19370-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The complexity of scoliosis-related terminology and treatment options often hinders patients and caregivers from understanding their choices, making it difficult to make informed decisions. As a result, many patients seek guidance from artificial intelligence (AI) tools. However, AI-generated health content may suffer from low readability, inconsistency, and questionable quality, posing risks of misinformation. This study evaluates the readability and informational quality of scoliosis-related content produced by AI. We evaluated five AI models-ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-o1, ChatGPT-o3 mini-high, DeepSeek-V3, and DeepSeek-R1-by querying each on three types of scoliosis: congenital, adolescent idiopathic, and neuromuscular. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and FleschKincaid Reading Ease (FKRE), while content quality was evaluated using the DISCERN score. Statistical analyses were performed in R-Studio. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). DeepSeek-R1 achieved the lowest FKGL (6.2) and the highest FKRE (64.5), indicating superior readability. In contrast, ChatGPT-o1 and ChatGPT-o3 mini-high scored above FKGL 12.0, requiring college-level reading skills. Despite readability differences, DISCERN scores remained stable across models (~ 50.5/80) with high inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.85-0.87), suggesting a fair level quality. However, all responses lacked citations, limiting reliability. AI-generated scoliosis education materials vary significantly in readability, with DeepSeek-R1 being the most accessible. Future AI models should enhance readability without compromising information accuracy and integrate real-time citation mechanisms for improved trustworthiness.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"35454"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the readability and quality of AI-generated scoliosis education materials: a comparative analysis of five language models.\",\"authors\":\"Mengchu Zhao, Mi Zhou, Yexi Han, Xiaomei Song, Youbin Zhou, Haoning He\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41598-025-19370-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The complexity of scoliosis-related terminology and treatment options often hinders patients and caregivers from understanding their choices, making it difficult to make informed decisions. As a result, many patients seek guidance from artificial intelligence (AI) tools. However, AI-generated health content may suffer from low readability, inconsistency, and questionable quality, posing risks of misinformation. This study evaluates the readability and informational quality of scoliosis-related content produced by AI. We evaluated five AI models-ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-o1, ChatGPT-o3 mini-high, DeepSeek-V3, and DeepSeek-R1-by querying each on three types of scoliosis: congenital, adolescent idiopathic, and neuromuscular. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and FleschKincaid Reading Ease (FKRE), while content quality was evaluated using the DISCERN score. Statistical analyses were performed in R-Studio. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). DeepSeek-R1 achieved the lowest FKGL (6.2) and the highest FKRE (64.5), indicating superior readability. In contrast, ChatGPT-o1 and ChatGPT-o3 mini-high scored above FKGL 12.0, requiring college-level reading skills. Despite readability differences, DISCERN scores remained stable across models (~ 50.5/80) with high inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.85-0.87), suggesting a fair level quality. However, all responses lacked citations, limiting reliability. AI-generated scoliosis education materials vary significantly in readability, with DeepSeek-R1 being the most accessible. Future AI models should enhance readability without compromising information accuracy and integrate real-time citation mechanisms for improved trustworthiness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"35454\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scientific Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-19370-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-19370-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the readability and quality of AI-generated scoliosis education materials: a comparative analysis of five language models.
The complexity of scoliosis-related terminology and treatment options often hinders patients and caregivers from understanding their choices, making it difficult to make informed decisions. As a result, many patients seek guidance from artificial intelligence (AI) tools. However, AI-generated health content may suffer from low readability, inconsistency, and questionable quality, posing risks of misinformation. This study evaluates the readability and informational quality of scoliosis-related content produced by AI. We evaluated five AI models-ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-o1, ChatGPT-o3 mini-high, DeepSeek-V3, and DeepSeek-R1-by querying each on three types of scoliosis: congenital, adolescent idiopathic, and neuromuscular. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and FleschKincaid Reading Ease (FKRE), while content quality was evaluated using the DISCERN score. Statistical analyses were performed in R-Studio. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). DeepSeek-R1 achieved the lowest FKGL (6.2) and the highest FKRE (64.5), indicating superior readability. In contrast, ChatGPT-o1 and ChatGPT-o3 mini-high scored above FKGL 12.0, requiring college-level reading skills. Despite readability differences, DISCERN scores remained stable across models (~ 50.5/80) with high inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.85-0.87), suggesting a fair level quality. However, all responses lacked citations, limiting reliability. AI-generated scoliosis education materials vary significantly in readability, with DeepSeek-R1 being the most accessible. Future AI models should enhance readability without compromising information accuracy and integrate real-time citation mechanisms for improved trustworthiness.
期刊介绍:
We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections.
Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021).
•Engineering
Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live.
•Physical sciences
Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics.
•Earth and environmental sciences
Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems.
•Biological sciences
Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants.
•Health sciences
The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.