Ophthalmic DiseaseNCT06859216
Evaluating AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries on Patient Comprehension of Ophthalmology Notes Among English-Speaking Patients
A study testing AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries in people with Ophthalmic Disease and Artifical Intelligence, run by University of California, Los Angeles at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This clinical trial is testing whether plain language summaries made by artificial intelligence help people understand their eye doctor's notes better. Adults receiving eye care at the Jules Stein Eye Institute will get either the usual medical notes or a note with the addition of an AI-generated summary that explains… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Ophthalmic Disease, Artifical Intelligence, Large Language Model
- What is being tested?
- AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 460 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2025to 1 Jun 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age ≥ 18 years English-speaking Receiving ophthalmology care at the Jules Stein Eye Institute Able to provide informed consent
Who cannot join
- Known cognitive impairments (e.g., dementia, intellectual disability) that would affect comprehension Prisoners or wards of the state Unable to provide informed consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United States1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
UCLA
Los Angeles, California, 90095
Prashant D Tailor, MD, 4043166920, ptailor@mednet.ucla.edu
About this study
This clinical trial is testing whether plain language summaries made by artificial intelligence help people understand their eye doctor's notes better. Adults receiving eye care at the Jules Stein Eye Institute will get either the usual medical notes or a note with the addition of an AI-generated summary that explains the information in simple, everyday words. Participants will then answer a short survey and receive a follow-up call to share how clear the information was, how well they understood their diagnosis and treatment, and whether they feel more confident about their care. The goal is to find out if these plain language summaries can make it easier for people to understand their eye care and improve communication between patients and health care providers.
Read the detailed description
This study employs a two-arm randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether artificial intelligence (AI)-generated plain language summaries (PLSs) can improve patient comprehension of ophthalmology notes. Eligible participants are recruited during their routine visits at the Jules Stein Eye Institute, and once screened using standardized clinical criteria, they are randomly assigned to either receive the standard ophthalmology note (SON) or the SON supplemented with an AI-generated PLS. The randomization process uses a computer-generated sequence with concealed allocation to ensure unbiased group assignment.
The AI system used in this study is deployed locally on a secured UCLA intranet. It leverages a large language model (LLM) that has been customized and validated for generating plain language explanations of complex ophthalmologic information. All processing occurs on UCLA-approved, encrypted devices, and no data are transmitted externally. Before the PLS is provided to participants, each summary is reviewed by an ophthalmologist to verify accuracy and ensure that essential clinical details are correctly and clearly communicated.
Data collection is performed using survey instruments. The survey includes a series of 5-point Likert scale items, open-ended questions, and structured response sections designed to assess comprehension of diagnosis, treatment plans, and follow-up instructions. Participants complete the survey immediately after their clinic visit, and a follow-up telephone interview is conducted approximately seven days later by trained research staff to capture additional feedback on clarity and retention of the information provided. The study does not employ audio or video recording; all responses are either directly recorded by research personnel or entered electronically into a secured database.
Statistical analyses will be conducted using standard software packages to compare outcomes between the intervention and control groups. Primary analyses include independent t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables, chi-square tests for categorical variables, and multivariable regression models to adjust for confounding variables such as age, education level, and baseline health literacy. The sample size was calculated to detect clinically meaningful differences in comprehension scores, with power analyses indicating a need for between 460 and 2030 participants depending on the effect size.
Data security is maintained through rigorous measures. Electronic data are stored on encrypted, UCLA-secured laptops and in a secure Box repository. All data handling follows UCLA policies and IRB guidelines for data retention and destruction, with identifiable information destroyed using secure methods once it is no longer required.
Quality control procedures include periodic audits of data entry, regular review meetings with study personnel, and cross-checks of survey responses against clinical records where applicable. An independent monitoring process is in place to ensure compliance with the study protocol and to address any deviations promptly.
Overall, this study is designed to provide robust evidence on the feasibility and effectiveness of AI-generated PLSs in enhancing patient understanding of complex medical information. By integrating technical safeguards, rigorous statistical methods, and a streamlined data collection process, the research aims to deliver insights that may lead to improved patient communication strategies and more effective health care delivery across multiple specialties.
- Being tested
- AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries
- Keywords
- Plain Language Summary, LLM, Artifical Intelligence, Patient education
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
AI-Generated Plain Language SummariesBehavioural
Participants receive standard ophthalmology notes plus an AI-generated summary that explains medical information in simpler language. Each summary is reviewed by an ophthalmologist for accuracy before being given to the participant. The goal is to help participants better understand their diagnosis, treatment plan, and follow-up instructions.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Ophthalmology Notes (SON) Only | No intervention | Participants in this arm receive the standard ophthalmology notes typically provided after their clinic visit, with no additional plain language summary. They will complete surveys that measure their comprehension and satisfaction with the visit notes. |
| SON + AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries | Experimental | Participants in this arm receive the standard ophthalmology notes plus an AI-generated plain language summary, reviewed for accuracy before distribution. They will complete the same surveys to assess whether the additional summary improves their understanding and satisfaction compared to the control group. Receives: Behavioral: AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patient Comprehension Score (Immediate Post-Visit)
Mean score on a 5-point scale assessing participants' understanding of their ophthalmology visit notes (diagnosis, treatment plan, follow-up instructions) immediately after the clinic visit. Higher scores indicate better comprehension.
Measured: Immediately post-visit (Day 0)
Secondary outcomes (9)
Patient Comprehension Score (1-Week Follow-Up)
Mean score on a 1-5 scale assessing retention of ophthalmology information one week after the clinic visit. Higher scores indicate better long-term comprehension.
Measured: 1 week post-visit
Patient Satisfaction
Mean satisfaction score (1-5 scale) measuring clarity, detail, and usefulness of the visit notes. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.
Measured: Immediately post-visit (Day 0)
Comprehension Gap Reduction
Difference in comprehension scores between participants with lower vs. higher baseline health literacy. A smaller gap indicates greater reduction in literacy-related disparities.
Measured: Day 0 and 1 week post-visit
Time Efficiency for Ophthalmologists
Average additional time (in minutes) required for ophthalmologists to review and edit AI-generated Plain Language Summaries, reported in the ophthalmologist survey. Lower times indicate better efficiency.
Measured: Day 0
Inbasket Message Rates
Number of patient-initiated messages (e.g., via patient portal) within 2 weeks after the visit. Lower message rates may indicate improved clarity and fewer follow-up questions.
Measured: 2 weeks post-visit
Medication Fill Compliance
Percentage of prescribed medications filled within 2 weeks after the visit. Higher percentages indicate better adherence and understanding of treatment plans.
Measured: 2 weeks post-visit
Ophthalmologist Satisfaction
Mean score (1-5 scale) from the ophthalmologist survey measuring satisfaction with the AI-generated summary's clarity and accuracy. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction.
Measured: Day 0
LLM Summarization Error Rate
Proportion of AI-generated summaries identified as having any errors by the reviewing ophthalmologist. Lower percentages indicate more accurate summaries.
Measured: Day 0
Error Rate for Ophthalmologist Overreads
Percentage of critical inaccuracies in the AI-generated summaries that could lead to misinterpretation of the patient's condition or plan. Lower rates indicate higher-quality summaries.
Measured: Day 0
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Mar 2025
- Study start1 Mar 2025
- Primary completion30 Apr 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Jun 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Ophthalmic DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, Los AngelesThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 460 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Los Angeles
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Prashant Tailor, University of California, Los Angeles
- Investigators
- Prashant Tailor, MD, Principal investigator, University of California, Los Angeles
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06859216
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 24-5649
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 23 Feb 2025
- Last updated
- 5 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the study's results will be shared. The IPD includes patient survey responses on comprehension of ophthalmology visit notes (both immediately post-visit and at 1-week follow-up), patient satisfaction ratings, and demographic information (age, gender, education level, and previous ophthalmology experience). Additionally, survey responses from ophthalmologists regarding the accuracy, clarity, and time efficiency of the AI-generated plain language summaries will be provided. All data will be fully de-identified in compliance with HIPAA and UCLA guidelines using unique study IDs to replace personal identifiers, and no code keys linking data to individual participants will be shared.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluating AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries on Patient Comprehension of Ophthalmology Notes Among English-Speaking Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06859216
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 24-5649
- Keywords
- Plain Language Summary, LLM, Artifical Intelligence, Patient education
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 460 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, Los AngelesUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 5 Mar 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This clinical trial is testing whether plain language summaries made by artificial intelligence help people understand their eye doctor's notes better. Adults receiving eye care at the Jules Stein Eye Institute will get either the usual medical notes or a note with the addition of an AI-generated summary that explains the information in simple, everyday words. Participants will then answer a short survey and receive a follow-up call to share how clear the information was, how well they understood their diagnosis and treatment, and whether they feel more confident about their care. The goal is to find out if these plain language summaries can make it easier for people to understand their eye care and improve communication between patients and health care providers.
Detailed description
This study employs a two-arm randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether artificial intelligence (AI)-generated plain language summaries (PLSs) can improve patient comprehension of ophthalmology notes. Eligible participants are recruited during their routine visits at the Jules Stein Eye Institute, and once screened using standardized clinical criteria, they are randomly assigned to either receive the standard ophthalmology note (SON) or the SON supplemented with an AI-generated PLS. The randomization process uses a computer-generated sequence with concealed allocation to ensure unbiased group assignment.
The AI system used in this study is deployed locally on a secured UCLA intranet. It leverages a large language model (LLM) that has been customized and validated for generating plain language explanations of complex ophthalmologic information. All processing occurs on UCLA-approved, encrypted devices, and no data are transmitted externally. Before the PLS is provided to participants, each summary is reviewed by an ophthalmologist to verify accuracy and ensure that essential clinical details are correctly and clearly communicated.
Data collection is performed using survey instruments. The survey includes a series of 5-point Likert scale items, open-ended questions, and structured response sections designed to assess comprehension of diagnosis, treatment plans, and follow-up instructions. Participants complete the survey immediately after their clinic visit, and a follow-up telephone interview is conducted approximately seven days later by trained research staff to capture additional feedback on clarity and retention of the information provided. The study does not employ audio or video recording; all responses are either directly recorded by research personnel or entered electronically into a secured database.
Statistical analyses will be conducted using standard software packages to compare outcomes between the intervention and control groups. Primary analyses include independent t-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables, chi-square tests for categorical variables, and multivariable regression models to adjust for confounding variables such as age, education level, and baseline health literacy. The sample size was calculated to detect clinically meaningful differences in comprehension scores, with power analyses indicating a need for between 460 and 2030 participants depending on the effect size.
Data security is maintained through rigorous measures. Electronic data are stored on encrypted, UCLA-secured laptops and in a secure Box repository. All data handling follows UCLA policies and IRB guidelines for data retention and destruction, with identifiable information destroyed using secure methods once it is no longer required.
Quality control procedures include periodic audits of data entry, regular review meetings with study personnel, and cross-checks of survey responses against clinical records where applicable. An independent monitoring process is in place to ensure compliance with the study protocol and to address any deviations promptly.
Overall, this study is designed to provide robust evidence on the feasibility and effectiveness of AI-generated PLSs in enhancing patient understanding of complex medical information. By integrating technical safeguards, rigorous statistical methods, and a streamlined data collection process, the research aims to deliver insights that may lead to improved patient communication strategies and more effective health care delivery across multiple specialties.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Ophthalmology Notes (SON) Only | No intervention | –Participants in this arm receive the standard ophthalmology notes typically provided after their clinic visit, with no additional plain language summary. They will complete surveys that measure their comprehension and satisfaction with the visit notes. |
| SON + AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries | Experimental | Behavioral: AI-Generated Plain Language SummariesParticipants in this arm receive the standard ophthalmology notes plus an AI-generated plain language summary, reviewed for accuracy before distribution. They will complete the same surveys to assess whether the additional summary improves their understanding and satisfaction compared to the control group. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Age ≥ 18 years English-speaking Receiving ophthalmology care at the Jules Stein Eye Institute Able to provide informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Known cognitive impairments (e.g., dementia, intellectual disability) that would affect comprehension Prisoners or wards of the state Unable to provide informed consent
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| AI-Generated Plain Language SummariesParticipants receive standard ophthalmology notes plus an AI-generated summary that explains medical information in simpler language. Each summary is reviewed by an ophthalmologist for accuracy before being given to the participant. The goal is to help participants better understand their diagnosis, treatment plan, and follow-up instructions. | Behavioural | SON + AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries |
Primary outcome
Patient Comprehension Score (Immediate Post-Visit)
Time frame: Immediately post-visit (Day 0)
Mean score on a 5-point scale assessing participants' understanding of their ophthalmology visit notes (diagnosis, treatment plan, follow-up instructions) immediately after the clinic visit. Higher scores indicate better comprehension.
9 secondary outcomes
Patient Comprehension Score (1-Week Follow-Up)
Time frame: 1 week post-visit
Patient Satisfaction
Time frame: Immediately post-visit (Day 0)
Comprehension Gap Reduction
Time frame: Day 0 and 1 week post-visit
Time Efficiency for Ophthalmologists
Time frame: Day 0
Inbasket Message Rates
Time frame: 2 weeks post-visit
Medication Fill Compliance
Time frame: 2 weeks post-visit
Ophthalmologist Satisfaction
Time frame: Day 0
LLM Summarization Error Rate
Time frame: Day 0
Error Rate for Ophthalmologist Overreads
Time frame: Day 0
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Mar 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the study's results will be shared. The IPD includes patient survey responses on comprehension of ophthalmology visit notes (both immediately post-visit and at 1-week follow-up), patient satisfaction ratings, and demographic information (age, gender, education level, and previous ophthalmology experience). Additionally, survey responses from ophthalmologists regarding the accuracy, clarity, and time efficiency of the AI-generated plain language summaries will be provided. All data will be fully de-identified in compliance with HIPAA and UCLA guidelines using unique study IDs to replace personal identifiers, and no code keys linking data to individual participants will be shared.
Related trials for Ophthalmic Disease
Recruiting
Effects of Balance Training in Individuals With Glaucoma
Glaucoma
RecruitingPhase 3
Dichoptic Treatment for Amblyopia in Children 8 to 12 Years of Age
Amblyopia
Recruiting
Impact of a Structured Wellness Behavioral Intervention on Quality of Life in NMOSD
Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder (NMOSD)
Active, not recruiting
Clinical Study Evaluating Nordlys™ SWT IPL for Dry Eye Disease (DED) Due to MGD
Meibomian Gland Dysfunction, Dry Eye Disease
Not yet recruiting
The EYERISING Study
Myopia, Astigmatism
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Prashant Tailor, MD principal investigator
University of California, Los Angeles
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing AI-Generated Plain Language Summaries in people with Ophthalmic Disease and Artifical Intelligence, run by University of California, Los Angeles at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Prashant Tailor, MD (4043166920, ptailor@mednet.ucla.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Patient Comprehension Score (Immediate Post-Visit) (time frame: Immediately post-visit (Day 0)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Mar 2026.