ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2024
ChatGPT: a reliable fertility decision-making tool?
Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The potential of large language models in the field of infertility: a systematic review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Women's Healthcare: A Systematic Review.Qatar medical journal · 2026Review
- Impacts of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Misinformation in Digital Spaces on Human Rights Protection and Promotion: Scoping Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Evaluating the quality of online fertility nutrition claims.Public health nutrition · 2025Article
- The PERFORM Study: Artificial Intelligence Versus Human Residents in Cross-Sectional Obstetrics-Gynecology Scenarios Across Languages and Time Constraints.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Female Infertility Diagnosis: An Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Radical Changes in Infertility Practice: It Is Coming Soon.Journal of reproduction & infertilityArticle
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
Abstract
The internet is the primary source of infertility-related information for most people who are experiencing fertility issues. Although no longer shrouded in stigma, the privacy of interacting only with a computer provides a sense of safety when engaging with sensitive content and allows for diverse and geographically dispersed communities to connect and share their experiences. It also provides businesses with a virtual marketplace for their products. The introduction of ChatGPT, a conversational language model developed by OpenAI to understand and generate human-like text in response to user input, in November 2022, and other emerging generative artificial intelligence (AI) language models, has changed and will continue to change the way we interact with large volumes of digital information. When it comes to its application in health information seeking, specifically in relation to fertility in this case, is ChatGPT a friend or foe in helping people make well-informed decisions? Furthermore, if deemed useful, how can we ensure this technology supports fertility-related decision-making? After conducting a study into the quality of the information provided by ChatGPT to people seeking information on fertility, we explore the potential benefits and pitfalls of using generative AI as a tool to support decision-making.
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.