ArticlePloS one2024
ChatGPT M.D.: Is there any room for generative AI in neurology?
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exploring the role of ChatGPT in patient care (diagnosis and treatment) and medical research: A systematic review.Health promotion perspectives · 2023Pooled it
- Large language models for generating longitudinal synthetic data in low-risk pregnancy care.Data in brief · 2026Article
- AI for clinical neurology: Comparing five large language models in neurological diagnosis and lesion localization.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Independent and collaborative performance of large language models and healthcare professionals in diagnosis and triage.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Cautionary lessons from real-world testing of GPT-4.1 AI for pediatric foreign body aspiration.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence chatbots in response to patient's common inquiries about chordoma: A cross-sectional study.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- A multi-agent approach to neurological clinical reasoning.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Large Language Models in Neurological Practice: Real-World Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Large Language Models in Neurology Treatment Decision-Making: a Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2025Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Management of Non-convulsive Seizures: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Clinical decision-making in neonatal gastrointestinal surgical emergencies: comparison between ChatGPT and human clinicians.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- A Novel Evaluation Model for Assessing ChatGPT on Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Certification Examinations: Performance Study.JMIR medical education · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ChatGPT, a general artificial intelligence, has been recognized as a powerful tool in scientific writing and programming but its use as a medical tool is largely overlooked. The general accessibility, rapid response time and comprehensive training database might enable ChatGPT to serve as a diagnostic augmentation tool in certain clinical settings. The diagnostic process in neurology is often challenging and complex. In certain time-sensitive scenarios, rapid evaluation and diagnostic decisions are needed, while in other cases clinicians are faced with rare disorders and atypical disease manifestations. Due to these factors, the diagnostic accuracy in neurology is often suboptimal. Here we evaluated whether ChatGPT can be utilized as a valuable and innovative diagnostic augmentation tool in various neurological settings. We used synthetic data generated by neurological experts to represent descriptive anamneses of patients with known neurology-related diseases, then the probability for an appropriate diagnosis made by ChatGPT was measured. To give clarity to the accuracy of the AI-determined diagnosis, all cases have been cross-validated by other experts and general medical doctors as well. We found that ChatGPT-determined diagnostic accuracy (ranging from 68.5% ± 3.28% to 83.83% ± 2.73%) can reach the accuracy of other experts (81.66% ± 2.02%), furthermore, it surpasses the probability of an appropriate diagnosis if the examiner is a general medical doctor (57.15% ± 2.64%). Our results showcase the efficacy of general artificial intelligence like ChatGPT as a diagnostic augmentation tool in medicine. In the future, AI-based supporting tools might be useful amendments in medical practice and help to improve the diagnostic process in neurology.
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.