Readability analysis of ChatGPT's responses on lung cancer

Abstract

For common diseases such as lung cancer, patients often use the internet to obtain medical information. As a result of advances in artificial intelligence and large language models such as ChatGPT, patients and health professionals use these tools to obtain medical information. The aim of this study was to evaluate the readability of ChatGPT-generated responses with different readability scales in the context of lung cancer. The most common questions in the lung cancer section of Medscape (R) were reviewed, and questions on the definition, etiology, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of lung cancer (both NSCLC and SCLC) were selected. A set of 80 questions were asked 10 times to ChatGPT via the OpenAI API. ChatGPT's responses were tested using various readability formulas. The mean Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning FOG Scale, SMOG Index, Automated Readability Index, Coleman-Liau Index, Linsear Write Formula, Dale-Chall Readability Score, and Spache Readability Formula scores are at a moderate level (mean and standard deviation: 40.52 +/- 9.81, 12.56 +/- 1.66, 13.63 +/- 1.54, 14.61 +/- 1.45, 15.04 +/- 1.97, 14.24 +/- 1.90, 11.96 +/- 2.55, 10.03 +/- 0.63 and 5.93 +/- 0.50, respectively). The readability levels of the answers generated by ChatGPT are collage and above and are difficult to read. Perhaps in the near future, the ChatGPT can be programmed to produce responses that are appropriate for people of different educational and age groups.