The diagnosis and management of prostate cancer (PCa), the second most common cancer in men worldwide, are highly complex. Hence, patients often seek knowledge through additional resources, including AI chatbots such as ChatGPT and Google Bard. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of LLMs in providing education on PCa. Common patient questions about PCa were collected from reliable educational websites and evaluated for accuracy, comprehensiveness, readability, and stability by two independent board-certified urologists, with a third resolving discrepancy. Accuracy was measured on a 3-point scale, comprehensiveness was measured on a 5-point Likert scale, and readability was measured using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) score and Flesch–Kincaid FK Grade Level. A total of 52 questions on general knowledge, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of PCa were provided to three LLMs. Although there was no significant difference in the overall accuracy of LLMs, ChatGPT-3.5 demonstrated superiority over the other LLMs in terms of general knowledge of PCa (p = 0.018). ChatGPT-4 achieved greater overall comprehensiveness than ChatGPT-3.5 and Bard (p = 0.028). For readability, Bard generated simpler sentences with the highest FRE score (54.7, p < 0.001) and lowest FK reading level (10.2, p < 0.001). ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4 and Bard generate accurate, comprehensive, and easily readable PCa material. These AI models might not replace healthcare professionals but can assist in patient education and guidance.

Background/Objectives: Bladder cancer, the most common and heterogeneous malignancy of the urinary tract, presents with diverse types and treatment options, making comprehensive patient education essential. As large language models (LLMs) emerge as a promising resource for disseminating medical information, their accuracy and validity compared to traditional methods remain under-explored. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in educating the public about bladder cancer. Methods: Frequently asked questions regarding bladder cancer were sourced from reputable educational materials and assessed for accuracy, comprehensiveness, readability, and consistency by two independent board-certified urologists, with a third resolving any discrepancies. The study utilized a 3-point Likert scale for accuracy, a 5-point Likert scale for comprehensiveness, and the Flesch–Kincaid (FK) Grade Level and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) scores to gauge readability. Results: ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Gemini were evaluated on 12 general questions, 6 questions related to diagnosis, 28 concerning treatment, and 7 focused on prevention. Across all categories, the correct response rate was notably high, with ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 achieving 92.5%, compared to 86.3% for Gemini, with no significant difference in accuracy. However, there was a significant difference in comprehensiveness (p = 0.011) across the models. Overall, a significant difference in performance was observed among the LLMs (p < 0.001), with ChatGPT-4 providing the most college-level responses, though these were the most challenging to read. Conclusions: In conclusion, our study adds value to the applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in bladder cancer education, with notable insights into the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and stability of the three LLMs.

Background: Bladder cancer, the most common and heterogeneous malignancy of the urinary tract, presents with diverse types and treatment options, making comprehensive patient education essential. As Large Language Models (LLMs) emerge as a promising resource for disseminating medical information, their accuracy and validity compared to traditional methods remain under-explored. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in educating the public about bladder cancer. Methods: Frequently asked questions regarding bladder cancer were sourced from reputable educational materials and assessed for accuracy, comprehensiveness, readability, and consistency by two independent board-certified urologists, with a third resolving any discrepancies. The study utilized a 3-point Likert scale for accuracy, a 5-point Likert scale for comprehensiveness, and the Flesch-Kincaid FK Grade Level and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) scores to gauge readability. Results: ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Gemini were evaluated on 12 general questions, 6 related to diagnosis, 28 concerning treatment, and 7 focused on prevention. Across all categories, the correct response rate was notably high, with ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 achieving 92.5%, compared to 86.3% for Gemini, with no significant difference in accuracy. However, there was a significant difference in comprehensiveness (p = 0.011) across the models. Overall, a significant difference in performance was observed among the LLMs (p < 0.001), with ChatGPT-4 providing the most college-level responses, though these were the most challenging to read. Conclusion: In conclusion, our study adds value to the applications of AI in bladder cancer education with notable insights on the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and stability of the three LLMs.