ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2024
The Role of ChatGPT in Medical Research: Progress and Limitations.
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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of large language model (ChatGPT) in healthcare: an umbrella review and evidence synthesis.Journal of biomedical science · 2025Pooled it
- Can ChatGPT provide reliable guidance to families of children with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy? A dual perspective of parents and experts.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Article
- Perceptions and experiences of generative artificial intelligence training to support research for Chinese nurses: A qualitative focus group study.International journal of nursing sciences · 2025Article
- Quantum leap in medical mentorship: exploring ChatGPT's transition from textbooks to terabytes.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- A Conversation with ChatGPT on Contentious Issues in Senescence and Cancer Research.Molecular pharmacology · 2024Article
- Embracing ChatGPT for Medical Education: Exploring Its Impact on Doctors and Medical Students.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- Using ChatGPT in Psychiatry to Design Script Concordance Tests in Undergraduate Medical Education: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- ChatGPT's potential to support home care for patients in the early period after orthopedic interventions and enhance public health.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2024Article
- GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Related Mental Health Issues; Insights from a Range of Social Media Platforms Using a Mixed-Methods Approach.Brain sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advancements in AI have resulted in the development of sophisticated language models like ChatGPT, which can generate human-like text. While ChatGPT is useful for clarifying concepts and providing basic guidance, it has limitations. It lacks the ability to provide the latest scientific information and access original medical databases. Studies have shown that ChatGPT's text can be robotic, shallow, and lacking a human touch. It has also been found to provide misleading or inaccurate information. Researchers and medical professionals should be aware of these limitations and not solely rely on ChatGPT for complex tasks. The human element and real-world experiences are indispensable in science, and consulting experts is advisable for reliable insights.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37452215What 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.