Previously submitted to: JMIR Formative Research (no longer under consideration since Mar 04, 2026)
Date Submitted: Feb 11, 2026
Open Peer Review Period: Feb 16, 2026 - Mar 4, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
AI Chatbots for Patient Education on Anaesthesia- Free Capsule Endoscopy: A Comparative Readability and Quality Study
ABSTRACT
Background:
Fully Automated Magnetically Controlled Capsule Endoscopy (FAMCCE) is a minimally invasive gastrointestinal diagnostic procedure that is typically performed without general anaesthesia. Despite this, misconceptions regarding anaesthesia requirements remain common and may contribute to patient anxiety and reduced acceptance. Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots are increasingly used as sources of health information, yet their effectiveness in addressing anaesthesia related misconceptions about FAMCCE has not been well studied.
Objective:
To evaluate and compare the readability, information quality, and patient centred suitability of widely accessible AI chatbots in explaining the anaesthesia free nature of FAMCCE.
Methods:
Five publicly available large language model based chatbots were assessed using twelve standardised, patient oriented prompts focusing on anaesthesia requirements, comfort, safety, and procedural expectation. Responses were analysed using established readability metrices (Flesch Reading Ease score, Flesch Kincaid Grade Level, Coleman Liau Index), the DISCERN instrument, and a five item Likert scale evaluating clarity, comprehensiveness, readability, patient friendliness, and informativeness. Evaluations were independently performed by three clinicians, and results were analysed using descriptive statistics and paired t tests.
Results:
Significant variation was observed across chatbots. ChatGPT 5.2, Google Gemini Fast, and Microsoft Copilot Smart demonstrated comparable overall suitability for patient education, whereas Claude 4.5 produced more linguistically complex responses and Perplexity AI showed scored lower readability and subjective quality measures. Higher DISCERN scores were associated with greater informational depth but increased linguistic complexity.
Conclusions:
AI chatbots differ substantially in their ability to communicate clear, accessible and patient friendly information regarding anaesthesia free FAMCCE. While several platforms show promise as supplementary educational tools, they should complement rather than replace clinician lead counselling. Further patient centred and longitudinal research is required.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.