ArticleCureus2024
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Primary Prevention of Common Musculoskeletal Diseases.
Article 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.
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.
- Applications of generative artificial intelligence in chronic pain: a scoping review.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Review
- Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Low Back Pain: a Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o and Gemini for gout management: a comparative analysis based on EULAR guidelines.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Performance of DeepSeek-R1 as a Patient Education Tool.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- Diet, Lifestyle Factors, and Quality of Life in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Evaluating the role of ChatGPT in rehabilitation medicine: a narrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Article
- The performance of OpenAI ChatGPT-4 and Google Gemini in virology multiple-choice questions: a comparative analysis of English and Arabic responses.BMC research notes · 2024Article
- Language discrepancies in the performance of generative artificial intelligence models: an examination of infectious disease queries in English and Arabic.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Primary Prevention of Common Musculoskeletal Diseases.Cureus · 2024Article
- Human versus Artificial Intelligence: ChatGPT-4 Outperforming Bing, Bard, ChatGPT-3.5 and Humans in Clinical Chemistry Multiple-Choice Questions.Advances in medical education and practice · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMusculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a leading cause of disability worldwide, with a growing burden across all demographics. With advancements in technology, conversational artificial intelligence (AI) platforms such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA) have become instrumental in disseminating health information. This study evaluated the effectiveness of ChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4 in delivering primary prevention information for common MSDs, emphasizing that the study is focused on prevention and not on diagnosis.
methodsThis mixed-methods study employed the CLEAR tool to assess the quality of responses from ChatGPT versions in terms of completeness, lack of false information, evidence support, appropriateness, and relevance. Responses were evaluated independently by two expert raters in a blinded manner. Statistical analyses included Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and paired samples t-tests to compare the performance across versions.
resultsChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 effectively provided primary prevention information, with overall performance ranging from satisfactory to excellent. Responses for low back pain, fractures, knee osteoarthritis, neck pain, and gout received excellent scores from both versions. Additionally, ChatGPT-4 was better than ChatGPT-3.5 in terms of completeness (p = 0.015), appropriateness (p = 0.007), and relevance (p = 0.036), and ChatGPT-4 performed better across most medical conditions (p = 0.010).
conclusionsChatGPT versions 3.5 and 4 are effective tools for disseminating primary prevention information for common MSDs, with ChatGPT-4 showing superior performance. This study underscores the potential of AI in enhancing public health strategies through reliable and accessible health communication. Advanced models such as ChatGPT-4 can effectively contribute to the primary prevention of MSDs by delivering high-quality health information, highlighting the role of AIs in addressing the global burden of chronic diseases. It is important to note that these AI tools are intended for preventive education purposes only and not for diagnostic use. Continuous improvements are necessary to fully harness the potential of AI in preventive medicine. Future studies should explore other AI platforms, languages, and secondary and tertiary prevention measures to maximize the utility of AIs in global health contexts.
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.