ReviewInnere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany)2023
[ChatGPT: aid to medical ethics decision making?]
Review in Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPhysicians have to make countless decisions every day. The medical, ethical and legal aspects are often intertwined and subject to change over time. Involving an ethics committee or arranging an ethical consultation are examples of potential aids to decision making. Whether and how artificial intelligence (AI) and the large language model (LLM) of the company OpenAI (San Francisco, CA, USA), known under the name ChatGPT, can also help and support ethical decision making is increasingly becoming a matter of controversial debate. MATERIAL AND
methodsBased on a case example, in which a female physician is confronted with ethical and legal issues and presents these to ChatGPT to come up with answers, the first indications of the strengths and weaknesses are ascertained.
conclusionDue to the rapid technical development and access to ever increasing quantities of data, the utilization should be closely observed and evaluated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37821756What 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.