Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human…

AI / informaticsUrology annals· 2026

Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human versus artificial intelligence comparison of resources and quality measurements - A benchmarking study from European association of urology (EAU) endourology.

Ravanth Baskaran, Omar Al-Gholmy, Wissam Kamal … Bhaskar K Somani

Stones & EndourologyAI / informaticsQ3IF 1.1

Websites scored higher on JAMA quality benchmarks than artificial intelligence-generated stone leaflets.

Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human versus artificial intelligence comparison of resources and quality measurements - A benchmarking study from European association of urology (EAU) endourology.

Ravanth Baskaran … Bhaskar K Somani

Urology annals · 2026 · Q3 in Urology

Background

Shockwave lithotripsy (shockwave lithotripsy) is a noninvasive method for removing stones, primarily used for small, uncomplicated urinary stones, as the number of kidney stone cases continues to rise.

Methods

We assessed the quality and readability of shockwave lithotripsy information available online and compared it with leaflets created by generative artificial intelligence (artificial intelligence).

n = 68 websites

Results

websites met more quality benchmarks, artificial intelligence leaflets met almost none

2.22score

Websites (JAMA)

0score

AI-leaflet (JAMA)

More results

With rising patient numbers, online information must be accurate and easy to understand.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative Artificial Intelligence) platforms such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek generated a patient leaflet.

Later, ChatGPT reviewed the artificial intelligence-generated information with DISCERN.

More results

No significant differences were seen in DISCERN ( P = 0.224), Flesch Reading Ease Score ( P = 0.652), and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level ( P = 0.866), but differences in JAMA scores were significant ( P = 0.0010).

“

Conclusion

Doing so enables them to make informed decisions and promotes their well-being during treatment, resulting in improved comfort and outcomes.

Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human versus artificial intelligence comparison of resources and quality measurements - A benchmarking study from European association of urology (EAU) endourology.

Assessing the quality and readability of patient information available for shockwave lithotripsy: Human versus artificial intelligence comparison of resources and quality measurements - A benchmarking study from European association of urology (EAU) endourology.

Related papers