ReviewMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2023
A Bibliometric Analysis of the Rise of ChatGPT in Medical Research.
Review in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Short-chain fatty acids and type 2 diabetes: a bibliometric analysis of knowledge structure, research hotspots, and future directions.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence for Discovery in Life Sciences.Bioconjugate chemistry · 2026Review
- A Cross-Sectional Study of Large Language Models in Lung Cancer Information Delivery: Readability, Quality, and Patient-Centred Evaluation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Compare the features of several mainstream AI software programmes: explore their accuracy and repeatability in solving queries related to pancreatic cysts.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer's Performance in Cosmetic Injection Consultation by Authoritative Plastic Surgeons.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- ChatGPT in Medical Education: Bibliometric and Visual Analysis.JMIR medical education · 2025Review
- Article
- Review
- Precision Oncology in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Comparative Study of Contextualized ChatGPT Models.Cureus · 2025Article
- A Systematic Bibliometric Analysis of Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Obesity (2014-2024).Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- Quantum leap in medical mentorship: exploring ChatGPT's transition from textbooks to terabytes.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation: A Critical Step in Multi-National Survey Studies.Journal of Korean medical science · 2024Review
- Exploring the Potential of Code-Free Custom GPTs in Ophthalmology: An Early Analysis of GPT Store and User-Creator Guidance.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Characterizing the Adoption and Experiences of Users of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Health Information in the United States: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- The policies on the use of large language models in radiological journals are lacking: a meta-research study.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Bibliometric top ten healthcare-related ChatGPT publications in the first ChatGPT anniversary.Narra J · 2024Article
- Bibliometric analysis of ChatGPT in medicine.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Global trends and hotspots of ChatGPT in medical research: a bibliometric and visualized study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Generative artificial intelligence in ophthalmology research writing: A comprehensive review of applications, detection tools, and ethical considerations.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid emergence of publicly accessible artificial intelligence platforms such as large language models (LLMs) has led to an equally rapid increase in articles exploring their potential benefits and risks. We performed a bibliometric analysis of ChatGPT literature in medicine and science to better understand publication trends and knowledge gaps. Following title, abstract, and keyword searches of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for ChatGPT articles published in the medical field, articles were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted from included articles, with citation counts obtained from PubMed and journal metrics obtained from Clarivate Journal Citation Reports. After screening, 267 articles were included in the study, most of which were editorials or correspondence with an average of 7.5 +/- 18.4 citations per publication. Published articles on ChatGPT were authored largely in the United States, India, and China. The topics discussed included use and accuracy of ChatGPT in research, medical education, and patient counseling. Among non-surgical specialties, radiology published the most ChatGPT-related articles, while plastic surgery published the most articles among surgical specialties. The average citation number among the top 20 most-cited articles was 60.1 +/- 35.3. Among journals with the most ChatGPT-related publications, there were on average 10 +/- 3.7 publications. Our results suggest that managing the inevitable ethical and safety issues that arise with the implementation of LLMs will require further research exploring the capabilities and accuracy of ChatGPT, to generate policies guiding the adoption of artificial intelligence in medicine and science.
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.