Evaluating AI-generated patient education materials for endometrial cancer surgery: a comparative analysis of response quality, reliability, and readability between ChatGPT and DeepSeek models.
- DOI
- 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988
- Published
- 2026
- Container
- Frontiers in public health
- Publisher
- Not recorded
- Open access
- yes
Credibility signals
limited evidence Score 45/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.
Show all credibility signals
- cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response.
- cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response.
- not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility.
- not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete.
- supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open.
- not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made.
- not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored.
- cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty.
Cite this work
BibTeX
@article{allodium:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988,
title = {Evaluating AI-generated patient education materials for endometrial cancer surgery: a comparative analysis of response quality, reliability, and readability between ChatGPT and DeepSeek models.},
author = {Tian L and Tang LY and Yang MT and Wang Y and He HN and He TW and Tang Y and Lin C and Hu HQ and Li J},
year = {2026},
journal = {Frontiers in public health},
doi = {10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988}
}RIS
TY - JOUR TI - Evaluating AI-generated patient education materials for endometrial cancer surgery: a comparative analysis of response quality, reliability, and readability between ChatGPT and DeepSeek models. AU - Tian L AU - Tang LY AU - Yang MT AU - Wang Y AU - He HN AU - He TW AU - Tang Y AU - Lin C AU - Hu HQ AU - Li J PY - 2026 JO - Frontiers in public health DO - 10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988 UR - https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988 ER -
APA
L, T., LY, T., MT, Y., Y, W., HN, H., TW, H., Y, T., C, L., HQ, H., & J, L. (2026). Evaluating AI-generated patient education materials for endometrial cancer surgery: a comparative analysis of response quality, reliability, and readability between ChatGPT and DeepSeek models.. Frontiers in public health. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1831988
Source records
- pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-25T08:46:32.529Z