Saji Jyothis G, Balagangatharan Aswini, Bajaj Somya, Swarnkar Vibha, Unni Devika, Dileep Aswathy
Emergency Medicine, Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Thrissur, IND.
Cardiology, Dr. Madhavan's Heart Centre, Madurai, IND.
Cureus. 2025 Mar 25;17(3):e81156. doi: 10.7759/cureus.81156. eCollection 2025 Mar.
Introduction Patient information guides are required, as they help to identify early diseases and complications and to prevent them. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being used to create patient education guides for easy accessibility to people. Methodology This was a cross-sectional study analyzing patient information guides regarding six anti-diabetic drugs created using ChatGPT (OpenAI, Inc., San Francisco, California, United States) and Gemini (Google LLC, Mountain View, California, United States), respectively. The patient information guides were on anti-diabetic drugs, including metformin, empagliflozin, liraglutide, glipizide, sitagliptin, and insulin glargine, and were created with the help of various prompts. Results There was no statistically significant difference found between any of the characteristics of the responses generated by the two AI tools, according to the P values obtained. Conclusion On comparing the two AI tools, there was not much difference noted in readability, reliability, and similarity.
引言 需要患者信息指南，因为它们有助于识别早期疾病和并发症并加以预防。人工智能（AI）工具正被用于创建患者教育指南，以便人们易于获取。方法 这是一项横断面研究，分别分析了使用ChatGPT（美国加利福尼亚州旧金山的OpenAI公司）和Gemini（美国加利福尼亚州山景城的谷歌有限责任公司）创建的关于六种抗糖尿病药物的患者信息指南。患者信息指南涉及抗糖尿病药物，包括二甲双胍、恩格列净、利拉鲁肽、格列吡嗪、西他列汀和甘精胰岛素，并借助各种提示创建。结果 根据获得的P值，在两种人工智能工具生成的回复的任何特征之间均未发现统计学上的显著差异。结论 在比较这两种人工智能工具时，在可读性、可靠性和相似性方面没有发现太大差异。
