Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39823022›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025

Artificial Intelligence Scribe and Large Language Model Technology in Healthcare Documentation: Advantages, Limitations, and Recommendations.

Sarah A Mess, Alison J Mackey, David E Yarowsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Use of Ambient Dictation Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Spaces in Surgery: A Scoping Review.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. "No BLT": The Rise and Risk of Acronyms in the Medical Record.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2026
    Article
  10. Artificial Intelligence Scribes in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Narrative Review.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sarah A MessFrom Sarah A. Mess, M. D., LLC, Columbia, MD.
Alison J MackeyDepartment of Linguistics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
David E YarowskyDepartment of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) scribe applications in the healthcare community are in the early adoption phase and offer unprecedented efficiency for medical documentation. They typically use an application programming interface with a large language model (LLM), for example, generative pretrained transformer 4. They use automatic speech recognition on the physician-patient interaction, generating a full medical note for the encounter, together with a draft follow-up e-mail for the patient and, often, recommendations, all within seconds or minutes. This provides physicians with increased cognitive freedom during medical encounters due to less time needed interfacing with electronic medical records. However, careful proofreading of the AI-generated language by the physician signing the note is essential. Insidious and potentially significant errors of omission, fabrication, or substitution may occur. The neural network algorithms of LLMs have unpredictable sensitivity to user input and inherent variability in their output. LLMs are unconstrained by established medical knowledge or rules. As they gain increasing levels of access to large corpora of medical records, the explosion of discovered knowledge comes with large potential risks, including to patient privacy, and potential bias in algorithms. Medical AI developers should use robust regulatory oversights, adhere to ethical guidelines, correct bias in algorithms, and improve detection and correction of deviations from the intended output.

Identifiers

PMID39823022
PMCPMC11737491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.