ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Applications of ChatGPT in Heart Failure Prevention, Diagnosis, Management, and Research: A Narrative Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explainable and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology: A Narrative Review of Clinical Applications, Operational Integration, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- ChatGPT Applications in Heart Failure: Patient Education, Readability Enhancement, and Clinical Utility.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Ethical Challenges and Current Opportunities of Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology.Avicenna journal of medicine · 2025Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Large Language and Multimodal Models in Detecting Spinal Stabilization Systems on X-Ray Images.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Dynamic alignment of large language models for evidence-grounded heart failure decision support.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of mortality, morbidity, and financial burden worldwide. The emergence of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) systems, presents new opportunities to enhance HF management. In this review, we identified and examined existing studies on the use of ChatGPT in HF care by searching multiple medical databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and Scopus). We assessed the role of ChatGPT in HF prevention, diagnosis, and management, focusing on its influence on clinical decision-making and patient education. However, ChatGPT faces limited training data, inherent biases, and ethical issues that hinder its widespread clinical adoption. We review these limitations and highlight the need for improved training approaches, greater model transparency, and robust regulatory compliance. Additionally, we explore the effectiveness of ChatGPT in managing HF, particularly in reducing hospital readmissions and improving patient outcomes with customized treatment plans while addressing social determinants of health (SDoH). In this review, we aim to provide healthcare professionals and policymakers with an in-depth understanding of ChatGPT's potential and constraints within the realm of HF care.
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.