The same way anyone lacking knowledge can confident say that they got the right information from anyone with experience: You don't. You just trust them. That's what I did with my gastrenterologist, I ended up got misdiagnosed for 4 years and instead of getting the treatment that I should be getting I lost weight, got osteoporosis and vitamin D deficiency.

4 years later the second doctor asked me "I wonder why did my colleague decided not to take a tissue sample from insert some place in the stomach. I said out loud "I didn't even know what that is, let along ask him why he didn't".

I was misdiagnosed with the 'common' diagnosis by 3 physicians, 2 NP, 2 PAs, and 1 specialist. 8 years...

Some random redditor ended up figuring it out. Then every physician from that point forward agreed with the diagnosis.

Licensed based medicine :(

Although the technology occasionally produces incorrect information, I still find it to be a helpful learning tool. I break down the information into bullet points and cross-check it with other sources to differentiate between accurate and inaccurate information--I know this isn't infallible. One of the advantages of using this technology is that it often presents me with new and intriguing information, which I might not have found otherwise. This allows me to ask new questions and explore the subject matter more profoundly, resulting in a better understanding and an opportunity to create a mental model.