ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2024
ChatGPT and Vaccines: Can AI Chatbots Boost Awareness and Uptake?
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A vaccine chatbot intervention for parents to improve HPV vaccination uptake among middle school girls: a cluster randomized trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- Leveraging Large Language Models to Address Common Vaccination Myths and Misconceptions.Vaccines · 2026Article
- Effectiveness, Usability, and Acceptability of ChatGPT With Retrieval-Augmented Generation (SIV-ChatGPT) in Increasing Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Uptake Among Older Adults: Quasi-Experimental Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Observational
- Proficiency, Clarity, and Objectivity of Large Language Models Versus Specialists' Knowledge on COVID-19's Impacts in Pregnancy: Cross-Sectional Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Evaluating Large Language Models for the National Premedical Exam in India: Comparative Analysis of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Bard.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- Assist me or replace me? Uncovering the influence of AI awareness on employees' counterproductive work behaviors.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Medical knowledge of ChatGPT in public health, infectious diseases, COVID-19 pandemic, and vaccines: multiple choice questions examination based performance.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Application of ChatGPT in reducing vaccine hesitancy and enhancing vaccine acceptance: hope or myth?Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2024Article
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
The global COVID-19 pandemic has affected all spheres of human life, resulting in millions of deaths and overwhelming medical facilities. Moreover, the world has witnessed great financial hardship because of job losses resulting in economic havoc. Many sections of society have contributed in different ways to slow the spread of the virus and protect public health. For example, medical scientists are praised for their efforts to develop COVID-19 vaccines. Clinical trials have shown that the COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 infections. However, many people around the world have been hesitant to get vaccinated. Vaccine misconceptions have emerged and increased due to a combination of factors, including the availability of information on the Internet and the influence of celebrities and opinion leaders. In this context, we have analyzed ChatGPT responses to relevant queries on vaccine misconceptions. The positive responses and supportive opinions provided by the AI chatbot could be instrumental in shaping people's perceptions of vaccines and in encouraging users to get vaccinated and reduce misconceptions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37428336What 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.