MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417515976 · doi:10.1016/j.ajoint.2025.100216

Assessing demographic variation in large language model outputs for patient education materials in cataract surgery

2025· article· en· W4417515976 on OpenAlex
Angel Gao, Abu Bakar Butt, Fred Min, Amin Hatamnejad, Keean Nanji, Husayn Gulamhusein

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAJO International · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReadabilityPatient educationIndigenousCataract surgeryReading (process)Grade levelSocioeconomic statusVariation (astronomy)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Demographic factors influence LLM readability and word count in cataract education • Indigenous and Black prompts elicited the most complex LLM-generated responses • Insured patients consistently received longer, more complex content across models • Geographic disparities across Canadian provinces were observed, with Nunavut receiving the least readable outputs. • No LLM met AMA readability standards; all exceeded sixth grade reading level To evaluate whether large language model (LLM)-generated patient education materials for cataract surgery vary in readability, length, and accuracy based on demographic modifiers including race, gender, geography, and insurance status. Cross-sectional study This study analyzed 7,000 responses from five LLMs (ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, DeepSeek, and Gemini) between March-May 2025 using 280 standardized prompts that varied by race, gender, province/territory, and insurance coverage. Each prompt was submitted five times. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Flesch Reading Ease (FRE), and SMOG index. Accuracy was assessed by dual blinded reviewers against AAO clinical guidelines. ANOVA was performed (α = 0.05). LLM outputs differed significantly across all metrics (p < 0.001). Gemini generated the longest (876 ± 143 words) and most complex text (FKGL 15.2 ± 0.8). Race, insurance status, and geography significantly impacted readability. Prompts referencing Indigenous patients were the most complex (FKGL 11.1 ± 1.8, FRE 36.5 ± 7.9). Insured prompts were longer and more complex (11.0 ± 1.7 vs. 10.8 ± 1.7; 429 vs. 399 words; p < 0.001). Prompts from Nunavut and Manitoba were the least readable (FKGL ≥ 11.1), while Quebec and PEI were most readable. Gender had minimal impact. No outputs contained clinically unsafe information, but most lacked sufficient depth. None of the responses met the AMA’s sixth-grade readability recommendation. LLM-generated patient education for cataract surgery varies by patient demographics. These disparities may hinder equitable access to health information and highlight the need for bias-aware development of AI tools in healthcare.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.426 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it