ArticleJournal of medical systems2024
Art or Artifact: Evaluating the Accuracy, Appeal, and Educational Value of AI-Generated Imagery in DALL·E 3 for Illustrating Congenital Heart Diseases.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of ChatGPT and DeepSeek in Urology Medical Education: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Integrating ChatGPT in Orthopedic Education for Medical Undergraduates: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Saudi Medical Students' Perceptions and Attitudes of Integrating Generative Artificial Intelligence Integration in Medical Education: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Bias, representation, and clinical fidelity in AI-generated images for medical education: a systematic literature review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A scoping review of the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in health profession education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- A Pilot Study Evaluating Traditional and Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Generated Bedside Art Interventions in Hospital Care.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Assessing the quality and educational applicability of AI-generated anterior segment images in ophthalmology.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- AI-Generated "Slop" in Online Biomedical Science Educational Videos: Mixed Methods Study of Prevalence, Characteristics, and Hazards to Learners and Teachers.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Applications, Challenges, and Prospects of Generative Artificial Intelligence Empowering Medical Education: Scoping Review.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Text to image generators for anatomical illustrations: potential and limitations.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
- Generative artificial intelligence in cardiovascular specialty care: a scoping review.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Designing Personalized Multimodal Mnemonics With AI: A Medical Student's Implementation Tutorial.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Evaluating Microsoft Bing with ChatGPT-4 for the assessment of abdominal computed tomography and magnetic resonance images.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2025Article
- Evaluating AI Capabilities in Bariatric Surgery: A Study on ChatGPT-4 and DALL·E 3's Recognition and Illustration Accuracy.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Evaluating diversity and stereotypes amongst AI generated representations of healthcare providers.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Review
- Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT in Cardiovascular Medicine: Innovations, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Reference Hallucination Score for Medical Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: Development and Usability Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly AI-Generated Imagery, has the potential to impact medical and patient education. This research explores the use of AI-generated imagery, from text-to-images, in medical education, focusing on congenital heart diseases (CHD). Utilizing ChatGPT's DALL·E 3, the research aims to assess the accuracy and educational value of AI-created images for 20 common CHDs. In this study, we utilized DALL·E 3 to generate a comprehensive set of 110 images, comprising ten images depicting the normal human heart and five images for each of the 20 common CHDs. The generated images were evaluated by a diverse group of 33 healthcare professionals. This cohort included cardiology experts, pediatricians, non-pediatric faculty members, trainees (medical students, interns, pediatric residents), and pediatric nurses. Utilizing a structured framework, these professionals assessed each image for anatomical accuracy, the usefulness of in-picture text, its appeal to medical professionals, and the image's potential applicability in medical presentations. Each item was assessed on a Likert scale of three. The assessments produced a total of 3630 images' assessments. Most AI-generated cardiac images were rated poorly as follows: 80.8% of images were rated as anatomically incorrect or fabricated, 85.2% rated to have incorrect text labels, 78.1% rated as not usable for medical education. The nurses and medical interns were found to have a more positive perception about the AI-generated cardiac images compared to the faculty members, pediatricians, and cardiology experts. Complex congenital anomalies were found to be significantly more predicted to anatomical fabrication compared to simple cardiac anomalies. There were significant challenges identified in image generation. Based on our findings, we recommend a vigilant approach towards the use of AI-generated imagery in medical education at present, underscoring the imperative for thorough validation and the importance of collaboration across disciplines. While we advise against its immediate integration until further validations are conducted, the study advocates for future AI-models to be fine-tuned with accurate medical data, enhancing their reliability and educational utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38780839What 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.