Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026

Author Spotlight: Implementation of BIVA for Analyzing Disease Risk Factors in Patients with Low Body Cell Mass
Published on: July 14, 2023
Evaluating AI-Based Chatbots for Exercise and Rehabilitation Strategies in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis:
1Faculty of Health Science, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
Background:
Although artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly recognized for enhancing efficiency in healthcare services, its role in exercise and rehabilitation strategies remains unclear.
Objectives:
To assess the quality, reliability, accuracy, and readability of three large language models (LLMs), ChatGPT-5, DeepSeek-R1, and Gemini 2.5, in response to questions commonly asked by patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) regarding exercise and rehabilitation strategies.
Methods:
Using a cross-sectional comparative design, a structured assessment framework was developed that included exercise- and rehabilitation-related questions grouped into five thematic domains between 22 and 29 September 2025: exercise and physical activity (S1), hand function (S2), joint protection techniques (S3), breathing and pulmonary health (S4), and general topics (S5). Information quality was evaluated with the modified DISCERN tool, while content reliability was evaluated with the Reliability Score, and accuracy was measured using a five-point likert Accuracy Scale. Readability was determined through the Flesch Reading Ease scale.
Results:
DeepSeek-R1 and ChatGPT-5 achieved significantly higher scores for quality, reliability, accuracy, and readability compared with Gemini 2.5. In the S1 and S2 subgroups, both models consistently outperformed Gemini 2.5 across all evaluation metrics. Mean readability scores were 50.20 for DeepSeek-R1, 46.66 for ChatGPT-5, and 37.33 for Gemini 2.5, indicating that all responses were classified as difficult to read.
Conclusions:
This study highlighted that DeepSeek-R1 and ChatGPT-5 generated more accurate and reliable RA-related responses than Gemini 2.5; however, the complex language used by all models may limit accessibility for patients with low health literacy, underscoring the need for professional supervision in RA exercise planning.
More Related Videos
08:40Isokinetic Robotic Device to Improve Test-Retest and Inter-Rater Reliability for Stretch Reflex Measurements in Stroke Patients with Spasticity
Published on: June 12, 2019
04:49Author Spotlight: Enhancing Post-Stroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation with Robotic Technologies for Improved Motor Recovery and Functional Outcomes
Published on: September 6, 2024