Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38819896›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Harnessing ChatGPT for Thematic Analysis: Are We Ready?

V Vien Lee, Stephanie C C van der Lubbe, Lay Hoon Goh, Jose Maria Valderas

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

V Vien Lee *Division of Family Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-0216-9032
Stephanie C C van der Lubbe *Division of Family Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9723-7017
Lay Hoon GohDivision of Family Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-1536-3050
Jose Maria ValderasDivision of Family Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9299-1555

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ChatGPT (OpenAI) is an advanced natural language processing tool with growing applications across various disciplines in medical research. Thematic analysis, a qualitative research method to identify and interpret patterns in data, is one application that stands to benefit from this technology. This viewpoint explores the use of ChatGPT in three core phases of thematic analysis within a medical context: (1) direct coding of transcripts, (2) generating themes from a predefined list of codes, and (3) preprocessing quotes for manuscript inclusion. Additionally, we explore the potential of ChatGPT to generate interview transcripts, which may be used for training purposes. We assess the strengths and limitations of using ChatGPT in these roles, highlighting areas where human intervention remains necessary. Overall, we argue that ChatGPT can function as a valuable tool during analysis, enhancing the efficiency of the thematic analysis and offering additional insights into the qualitative data. While ChatGPT may not adequately capture the full context of each participant, it can serve as an additional member of the analysis team, contributing to researcher triangulation through knowledge building and sensemaking.

Indexed as

Natural Language ProcessingHumansQualitative ResearchChatGPTefficiencymedical researchnatural language processingNLPqualitative dataqualitative researchtechnologythematic analysisviewpoint

Identifiers

PMID38819896
PMCPMC11179012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.