ArticleCureus2023
Applicability of ChatGPT in Assisting to Solve Higher Order Problems in Pathology.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
79 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of Natural Language Processing models on diagnosis and decision-making in healthcare, business, education, and sports: a review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative analysis of ChatGPT and Gemini (Bard) in medical inquiry: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Applications and Concerns of ChatGPT and Other Conversational Large Language Models in Health Care: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Role-based evaluation of artificial intelligence chatbot responses in orthodontic emergency scenarios: accuracy, readability, understandability, and patient-oriented communication.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- The Utility of ChatGPT for Medical Students on Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Rotations.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative performance of ChatGPT, Gemini, and Deepseek on endodontic exam questions in Turkish and English.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Can ChatGPT be trusted? Evaluating AI responses to oral health questions among pregnant Arabic-speaking women.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Article
- Diagnostic Performance of ChatGPT-4.0 in Histopathological Analysis of Gliomas: A Single Institution Experience.Neuropathology : official journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology · 2025Article
- Large Language Models in Medical Image Analysis: A Systematic Survey and Future Directions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Large language model trained on clinical oncology data predicts cancer progression.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Potential of ChatGPT as a Supplementary Intelligent Virtual Assistant in Periodontology.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Is there any room for ChatGPT AI bot in speech-language pathology?European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Unveiling the risks of ChatGPT in diagnostic surgical pathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing the proficiency of large language models on funduscopic disease knowledge.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Article
19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Artificial intelligence (AI) is evolving for healthcare services. Higher cognitive thinking in AI refers to the ability of the system to perform advanced cognitive processes, such as problem-solving, decision-making, reasoning, and perception. This type of thinking goes beyond simple data processing and involves the ability to understand and manipulate abstract concepts, interpret, and use information in a contextually relevant way, and generate new insights based on past experiences and accumulated knowledge. Natural language processing models like ChatGPT is a conversational program that can interact with humans to provide answers to queries. Objective We aimed to ascertain the capability of ChatGPT in solving higher-order reasoning in the subject of pathology. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted on the internet using an AI-based chat program that provides free service for research purposes. The current version of ChatGPT (January 30 version) was used to converse with a total of 100 higher-order reasoning queries. These questions were randomly selected from the question bank of the institution and categorized according to different systems. The responses to each question were collected and stored for further analysis. The responses were evaluated by three expert pathologists on a zero to five scale and categorized into the structure of the observed learning outcome (SOLO) taxonomy categories. The score was compared by a one-sample median test with hypothetical values to find its accuracy. Result A total of 100 higher-order reasoning questions were solved by the program in an average of 45.31±7.14 seconds for an answer. The overall median score was 4.08 (Q1-Q3: 4-4.33) which was below the hypothetical maximum value of five (one-test median test p <0.0001) and similar to four (one-test median test p = 0.14). The majority (86%) of the responses were in the "relational" category in the SOLO taxonomy. There was no difference in the scores of the responses for questions asked from various organ systems in the subject of Pathology (Kruskal Wallis p = 0.55). The scores rated by three pathologists had an excellent level of inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.975 [95% CI: 0.965-0.983]; F = 40.26; p < 0.0001). Conclusion The capability of ChatGPT to solve higher-order reasoning questions in pathology had a relational level of accuracy. Hence, the text output had connections among its parts to provide a meaningful response. The answers from the program can score approximately 80%. Hence, academicians or students can get help from the program for solving reasoning-type questions also. As the program is evolving, further studies are needed to find its accuracy level in any further versions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.