[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-422515-105":59,"doc-detail-422515-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","evaluation-of-the-artificial-intelligence-chatbots-in-frequently-asked-questions-about-retinitis-pigmentosa-a-comparative-analysis-between-chatgpt-4-and-gemini-20","Evaluation of the artificial intelligence chatbots in frequently asked questions about retinitis pigmentosa - a comparative analysis between ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2.0","","Background evaluates accuracy and readability of responses to common retinitis pigmentosa (RP) questions generated by ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2.0. In March 2025, RP-related FAQs from Google’s first page were used to prompt both models in standard and sixth-grade simplified formats. Two ophthalmologists scored answers to 30 patient-asked questions using a five-point Likert scale, while eight readability indices quantified comprehension ease. No significant accuracy differences emerged; standard answers were generally harder to read, while simplified responses reduced educational demands. Gemini-2.0 improved readability under several indices. Conclusions: both chatbots can deliver tailored, accurate RP information aligned to patients’ reading levels.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/evaluation-of-the-artificial-intelligence-chatbots-in-frequently-asked-questions-about-retinitis-pigmentosa-a-comparative-analysis-between-chatgpt-4-and-gemini-20/422515/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/evaluation-of-the-artificial-intelligence-chatbots-in-frequently-asked-questions-about-retinitis-pigmentosa-a-comparative-analysis-between-chatgpt-4-and-gemini-20/422515.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Mafia Boss","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-09-28",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":39},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What was the study’s main goal for AI chatbot responses about retinitis pigmentosa (RP)?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"To evaluate the accuracy and readability of answers to common RP questions generated by ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2.0, including standard and simplified formats.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were the RP questions and chatbot prompts selected and formatted?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"RP FAQs were entered to Google in March 2025 and the first-page websites were used to form questions; the models were prompted to generate responses in standard form and in a sixth-grade comprehension level format.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How were chatbot answers evaluated for accuracy and readability?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Two ophthalmologists graded 30 responses using a five-point Likert scale, and eight readability indices were calculated with an online tool to measure comprehension ease.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},422515,1790790919,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":39,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":24,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},962090760730,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Biçer and Şahlı International Journal of Retina and Vitreous (2026) 12:1  \n[https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-025-00772-4](https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-025-00772-4)  \nInternational Journal of Retina and Vitreous  \nRESEARCH Open Access  \nEvaluation of the artificial intelligence  chatbots in frequently asked questions about retinitis pigmentosa: a comparative analysis between ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2.0  \nÖzlem Biçer 1,2* and Esra Şahlı3  \nAbstract  \nBackground To evaluate the accuracy and readability of answers to common retinitis pigmentosa (RP) questions from the popular generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2 .0.  \nMethods In March 2025, frequently asked questions about RP was entered to Google search tool, and the websites appearing on the first search page were selected for enrollment in the study. ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2 .0 were then prompted to generate responses about RP in both standard and simplified formats. To generate the simplified response, the following request was added to the prompt:‘Please provide a response suitable for the average American adult, at a sixth-grade comprehension level.’The AI chatbots’ responses to 30 questions about RP, frequently asked by patients, were evaluated by two ophthalmologists using a five-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 1–5. Additionally, 8 readability indices, including Average Reading Level Consensus Calculator (ARLC), Automated Readability Index (ARI), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), Gunning Fog Index (GFOG), Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Coleman–Liau Index (CL), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and Forcast Readability Formula (FRF) were calculated using an online calculator, [Readabilityformulas.com](Readabilityformulas.com), to assess the ease of comprehension of each answer. Results No significant difference showed in accuracy both standard and simplified AI chatbot responses (p = 0 . 557, p = 0 . 090) . In particular, almost all readability indices suggest that standard AI chatbot responses require a higher level of education for comprehension, whereas simplified responses require a lower level of education. Although Gemini-2 .0 standard responses were more readable than ChatGPT-4 standard responses according to ARI, GFOG and FRF scores (p = 0 . 014, p = 0 . 040, and p = 0 . 001), Gemini-2 .0 simplified responses were more readable than ChatGPT-4 simplified responses solely according to FRF scores (p = 0 . 016) .  \nConclusions This study shows that ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2 .0 can provide patients with an avenue to access comprehensive and accurate information about, tailored RP to their educational level.  \nKeywords Artificial intelligence, ChatGPT-4, Gemini-2 . 0, Readability, Retinitis pigmentosa  \n*Correspondence:  \nÖzlem Biçer  \n[ozlembicer90@gmail.com](ozlembicer90@gmail.com)  \n1Dr Hulusi Alataş Elmadağ State Hospital, Ankara, Turkey  \n2Ankara University Graduate School of Health Science, Vision, Artificial Vision and Rehabilitation of Low Vision, Master Program, Ankara, Turkey 3Department of Ophthalmology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey  \n© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit [http://creativecommons.org/l](http://creativecommo","cbCaiqQ9ViONuQCb","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiqQ9ViONuQCb","pdf",934870,"English","# Abstract\n## Background\n## Methods\n## Results\n## Conclusions\n# Background\n## Applications of artificial intelligence in medicine\n## Need to evaluate chatbot responses for RP","[{\"question\":\"What was the study’s main goal for AI chatbot responses about retinitis pigmentosa (RP)?\",\"answer\":\"To evaluate the accuracy and readability of answers to common RP questions generated by ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2.0, including standard and simplified formats.\"},{\"question\":\"How were the RP questions and chatbot prompts selected and formatted?\",\"answer\":\"RP FAQs were entered to Google in March 2025 and the first-page websites were used to form questions; the models were prompted to generate responses in standard form and in a sixth-grade comprehension level format.\"},{\"question\":\"How were chatbot answers evaluated for accuracy and readability?\",\"answer\":\"Two ophthalmologists graded 30 responses using a five-point Likert scale, and eight readability indices were calculated with an online tool to measure comprehension ease.\"}]","Evaluation of the artificial intelligence chatbots in frequently asked questions about retinitis pigmentosa - a comparative analysis between ChatGPT-4 and Gemini-2.0 | PDF",1790627772,13]