Comparative performance of ChatGPT-4.0, DeepSeek, Gemini and Perplexity in answering common questions from patients with COPD

Abstract Large language models (LLMs) may help with patient education, but clinicians must check LLM responses for accuracy, comprehensiveness, readability, and safety. This study compared responses from the LLMs ChatGPT-4.0, DeepSeek, Gemini, and Perplexity to 20 English-language questions about COPD that patients could present. Each question was submitted once to each LLM. Three COPD experts were blinded to the source LLM and independently scored 80 LLM responses for accuracy and comprehensiveness. Three readability indices were recorded; because they were strongly correlated, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) was used as the primary readability metric. Accuracy differed across responses from the four LLMs (Friedman χ²(3) = 38.902, P < 0.001, Kendall’s W = 0.648), as did comprehensiveness (χ²(3) = 52.468, P < 0.001, Kendall’s W = 0.874). ChatGPT-4.0 and DeepSeek did not differ significantly on either outcome, and both scored higher than Gemini and Perplexity. Mean ratings from three experts showed moderate inter-rater reliability for accuracy [ICC(A,3) = 0.571] and comprehensiveness [ICC(A,3) = 0.685]. Perplexity had the highest FKGL, and no LLM consistently met the approximate eighth-grade target. Patient-facing LLM responses require clinical review.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-09-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-70606-2
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative performance of ChatGPT-4.0, DeepSeek, Gemini and Perplexity in answering common questions from patients with COPD

SHEN Yinli, Yunlan JIANG, Hui JIANG, Zengli CHEN et al.
Scientific Reports
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Comparative performance of ChatGPT-4.0, DeepSeek, Gemini and Perplexity in answering common questions from patients with COPD

SHEN Yinli, Yunlan JIANG, Hui JIANG, Zengli CHEN, Lunhui WU, Hongmei XIE
article en

Abstract

Abstract Large language models (LLMs) may help with patient education, but clinicians must check LLM responses for accuracy, comprehensiveness, readability, and safety. This study compared responses from the LLMs ChatGPT-4.0, DeepSeek, Gemini, and Perplexity to 20 English-language questions about COPD that patients could present. Each question was submitted once to each LLM. Three COPD experts were blinded to the source LLM and independently scored 80 LLM responses for accuracy and comprehensiveness. Three readability indices were recorded; because they were strongly correlated, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) was used as the primary readability metric. Accuracy differed across responses from the four LLMs (Friedman χ²(3) = 38.902, P < 0.001, Kendall’s W = 0.648), as did comprehensiveness (χ²(3) = 52.468, P < 0.001, Kendall’s W = 0.874). ChatGPT-4.0 and DeepSeek did not differ significantly on either outcome, and both scored higher than Gemini and Perplexity. Mean ratings from three experts showed moderate inter-rater reliability for accuracy [ICC(A,3) = 0.571] and comprehensiveness [ICC(A,3) = 0.685]. Perplexity had the highest FKGL, and no LLM consistently met the approximate eighth-grade target. Patient-facing LLM responses require clinical review.

Scientific Reports
Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (CN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.