ArticleIndian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India2024
Exploring the Ability of ChatGPT to Act as a Research Aid in Otolaryngology.
Article in Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Large Language Models' Concordance With Guidelines on Olfaction.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently artificial intelligence (AI) platforms have developed at a rapid pace. To date no studies have explored AI platform ChatGPT's ability to serve as an aid in research in the field of otolaryngology. The objective of our study is to evaluate the ability of ChatGPT to generate unique research ideas relevant to Otolaryngology. ChatGPT was tasked to generate novel research project ideas. Seven categories for all otolaryngology subspecialties were created: general otolaryngology, facial plastics and reconstructive surgery, rhinology and skull base surgery, pediatrics, head and neck oncology, laryngology, and otology/neurotology. Within each of the subspecialties, ChatGPT was prompted to provide research ideas for two specific research topics in order to gauge ChatGPT's ability to explore specific domains. Ten prompts were entered for general otolaryngology, and five prompts were entered for each subspecialty and subspecialty topic. ChatGPT was subsequently prompted with the same query to generate systematic review ideas for each category. Ideas were deemed novel if there were no similar systematic reviews retrieved during the literature review on PubMed, Scopus, or Web of Science. Ideas were graded for Clinical Relevance on a scale of 0 to 5, 5 being considered highly relevant/would contribute greatly to patient care and 0 being considered not relevant/not beneficial to patient care. Two reviewers graded each response. Out of 100 systematic review ideas generated by ChatGPT, we found that the artificial intelligence platform was incapable of creating unique systematic review research ideas. However, the ideas that it did generate were largely feasible and clinically relevant. Future studies should investigate the ability of ChatGPT to generate research inquiries with non-systematic review methodologies and in more specific otolaryngology topics.
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.