ReviewCureus2024
Ethical Concerns About ChatGPT in Healthcare: A Useful Tool or the Tombstone of Original and Reflective Thinking?
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of generative artificial intelligence tools on assessment equity for non-native English-speaking medical students: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Emerging shadow health systems: regulating health-focused generative AI chatbots from a European perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a multi-metric framework for evaluating patient-facing AI communication in cosmetic dentistry: an exploratory proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Article
- Addressing Commonly Asked Questions in Urogynecology: Accuracy and Limitations of ChatGPT.International urogynecology journal · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of User Attitudes Toward GenAI: Influencing Factors and Industry Perspectives.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Review
- [What is the potential of ChatGPT for qualified patient information? : Attempt of a structured analysis on the basis of a survey regarding complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in rheumatology].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2025Article
- Assessing Familiarity, Usage Patterns, and Attitudes of Medical Students Toward ChatGPT and Other Chat-Based AI Apps in Medical Education: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Evaluating AI performance in nephrology triage and subspecialty referrals.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Large language models in oncology: a review.BMJ oncology · 2025Review
- ChatGPT utilization within the building blocks of the healthcare services: A mixed-methods study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI), the uprising technology of computer science aiming to create digital systems with human behavior and intelligence, seems to have invaded almost every field of modern life. Launched in November 2022, ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) is a textual AI application capable of creating human-like responses characterized by original language and high coherence. Although AI-based language models have demonstrated impressive capabilities in healthcare, ChatGPT has received controversial annotations from the scientific and academic communities. This chatbot already appears to have a massive impact as an educational tool for healthcare professionals and transformative potential for clinical practice and could lead to dramatic changes in scientific research. Nevertheless, rational concerns were raised regarding whether the pre-trained, AI-generated text would be a menace not only for original thinking and new scientific ideas but also for academic and research integrity, as it gets more and more difficult to distinguish its AI origin due to the coherence and fluency of the produced text. This short review aims to summarize the potential applications and the consequential implications of ChatGPT in the three critical pillars of medicine: education, research, and clinical practice. In addition, this paper discusses whether the current use of this chatbot is in compliance with the ethical principles for the safe use of AI in healthcare, as determined by the World Health Organization. Finally, this review highlights the need for an updated ethical framework and the increased vigilance of healthcare stakeholders to harvest the potential benefits and limit the imminent dangers of this new innovative technology.
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.