Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 7, 2026

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
Efficacy of Large Language Models in Providing Evidence-Based Patient Education for Celiac Disease: A Comparative
Luisa Bertin1,2, Federica Branchi3, Carolina Ciacci4
1Department of Surgery, Oncology, Gastroenterology, University of Padua, 35128 Padua, Italy.
Abstract:
Background/Objectives: Large language models (LLMs) show promise for patient education, yet their safety and efficacy for chronic diseases requiring lifelong management remain unclear. This study presents the first comprehensive comparative evaluation of three leading LLMs for celiac disease patient education. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional evaluation comparing ChatGPT-4, Claude 3.7, and Gemini 2.0 using six blinded clinical specialists (four gastroenterologists and two dietitians). Twenty questions spanning four domains (general understanding, symptoms/diagnosis, diet/nutrition, lifestyle management) were evaluated for scientific accuracy, clarity (5-point Likert scales), misinformation presence, and readability using validated computational metrics (Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, SMOG index). Results: Gemini 2.0 demonstrated superior performance across multiple dimensions. Gemini 2.0 achieved the highest scientific accuracy ratings (median 4.5 [IQR: 4.5-5.0] vs. 4.0 [IQR: 4.0-4.5] for both competitors, p = 0.015) and clarity scores (median 5.0 [IQR: 4.5-5.0] vs. 4.0 [IQR: 4.0-4.5], p = 0.011). While Gemini 2.0 showed numerically lower misinformation rates (13.3% vs. 23.3% for ChatGPT-4 and 24.2% for Claude 3.7), differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.778). Gemini 2.0 achieved significantly superior readability, requiring approximately 2-3 fewer years of education for comprehension (median Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level 9.8 [IQR: 8.8-10.3] vs. 12.5 for both competitors, p < 0.001). However, all models exceeded recommended 6th-8th grade health literacy targets. Conclusions: While Gemini 2.0 demonstrated statistically significant advantages in accuracy, clarity, and readability, misinformation rates of 13.3-24.2% across all models represent concerning risk levels for direct patient applications. AI offers valuable educational support but requires healthcare provider supervision until misinformation rates improve.
Related Concept Videos
Inflammatory Bowel Disease III: Diagnostic Studies and Management I-Nutritional Therapy
Diagnostic studies
A colonoscopy is the definitive screening test, distinguishing ulcerative colitis from other colon diseases with similar symptoms. During a colonoscopy test, inflamed mucosa with exudate ulcerations can be observed, and biopsies are taken to determine the histologic characteristics of the...
Cancer Survival Analysis

