ArticleJournal of physical therapy science2024
Evaluation of the accuracy of ChatGPT's responses to and references for clinical questions in physical therapy.
Article in Journal of physical therapy science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Generative AI and Large Language Models in Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Shaping AI in Pelvic Floor Physiotherapy: The Impact of Role-Play Prompting on ChatGPT Response Quality.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Reference Accuracy in Large Language Model Chatbots: A Metric for Inherent Misinformation?Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- A comparative evaluation of ChatGPT and Gemini for stroke caregiver support: accuracy, safety, and response characteristics.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
- Quality, readability, and patient safety of ChatGPT-generated responses to fall-related questions in older adults: a multidisciplinary evaluation.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in maxillofacial trauma: expert ally or unreliable assistant?Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2025Article
- A cross-sectional study on ChatGPT's alignment with clinical practice guidelines in musculoskeletal rehabilitation.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Observational
- Evaluating the role of ChatGPT in rehabilitation medicine: a narrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] This study evaluated the accuracy of ChatGPT's responses to and references for five clinical questions in physical therapy based on the
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.