ArticleScientific reports2024
Use of large language models as artificial intelligence tools in academic research and publishing among global clinical researchers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Group discussions improve reliability and validity of rated categories based on qualitative data from systematic review.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- A Structural Shift in the Readability of Ophthalmology Abstracts in Late 2023.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Accelerated use of artificial intelligence-associated vocabulary in Japanese surgical journals after 2023.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Research Methods in Genetic Counseling: Diverse Methods, Shared Purpose.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Potential and limitations of a large language model in the statistical review of comparative categorical data: an exploratory study of structured prompt-guided approach.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Research Ethics Committees (RECs) perspectives on large language models and AI ethics review: a South African case.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- From reviews to real-time: dynamic evidence in dentistry.Evidence-based dentistry · 2026Article
- Grounding large language models in clinical diagnostics.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Evaluating the performance of a generative AI model in assessing qualitative health research articles adherence to objective reporting standards.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Large Language Models in Surgery: Promise, Pitfalls, and Practical Use.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2026Review
- Patients' perception towards large language models in otorhinolaryngology, head and neck surgery: a single-centre survey.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Assessment of the efficacy of ChatGPT responses to bacterial species-specific questions in microbiology.Access microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative analysis of text readability and writing styles in AI-generated vs. Human-written academic abstracts.PloS one · 2026Article
- Undergraduate Nursing Students' Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Academia.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2025Article
- The future of reviews writing in the AI era.Nature reviews. Chemistry · 2025Article
- Generative artificial intelligence in ophthalmology research writing: A comprehensive review of applications, detection tools, and ethical considerations.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With breakthroughs in Natural Language Processing and Artificial Intelligence (AI), the usage of Large Language Models (LLMs) in academic research has increased tremendously. Models such as Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) are used by researchers in literature review, abstract screening, and manuscript drafting. However, these models also present the attendant challenge of providing ethically questionable scientific information. Our study provides a snapshot of global researchers' perception of current trends and future impacts of LLMs in research. Using a cross-sectional design, we surveyed 226 medical and paramedical researchers from 59 countries across 65 specialties, trained in the Global Clinical Scholars' Research Training certificate program of Harvard Medical School between 2020 and 2024. Majority (57.5%) of these participants practiced in an academic setting with a median of 7 (2,18) PubMed Indexed published articles. 198 respondents (87.6%) were aware of LLMs and those who were aware had higher number of publications (p < 0.001). 18.7% of the respondents who were aware (n = 37) had previously used LLMs in publications especially for grammatical errors and formatting (64.9%); however, most (40.5%) did not acknowledge its use in their papers. 50.8% of aware respondents (n = 95) predicted an overall positive future impact of LLMs while 32.6% were unsure of its scope. 52% of aware respondents (n = 102) believed that LLMs would have a major impact in areas such as grammatical errors and formatting (66.3%), revision and editing (57.2%), writing (57.2%) and literature review (54.2%). 58.1% of aware respondents were opined that journals should allow for use of AI in research and 78.3% believed that regulations should be put in place to avoid its abuse. Seeing the perception of researchers towards LLMs and the significant association between awareness of LLMs and number of published works, we emphasize the importance of developing comprehensive guidelines and ethical framework to govern the use of AI in academic research and address the current challenges.
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.