Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1. Objective readability scores
Comparison of readability between original clinic letters and AI-generated outputs revealed no significant difference in A: Flesch-Kincaid score, B: SMOG score, C: Coleman-Liau score or D: Automatic readability score. A significant decrease in readability score of AI generated output (equivalent to a decrease in reading age) was observed in E: Gunning Fog score (P<0.05) compared with the original clinic letters. * P<0.05.
- Figure 2. Results from patient representative analysis
Patient representatives were presented with a mixture of original clinic letters and AI-generated outputs (but not the original and AI output of the same letter) and asked to rate their understanding of the content across a series of questions. There was a significant increase in understanding of content and approval of AI-generated outputs compared with original clinic letters. There was a significant decrease in the requirement for patient representatives to require medical assistance with understanding the content of AI-generated outputs compared with original clinic letters. ****P<0.0001
Tables
Demographic criteria Patient representatives Gender: female (n, %) 7, 47% Age range, years (n) 35–44 = 1
45–54 = 1
55–64 = 4
≥65 = 9Education (n) Secondary education = 3
Further education = 4
Degree or higher = 8Ethnicity (n) White/Caucasian = 13
Mixed/multiple ethnic groups = 2English as first language: Yes (n, %) 15, 100%
In this issue
LinkedIn
Jump to section
Keywords
More in this TOC Section
Related Articles
Cited By...
