ArticleSurgery in practice and science2023
ChatGPT: Friend or foe in medical writing? An example of how ChatGPT can be utilized in writing case reports.
Article in Surgery in practice and science, 2023. 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.
- Developing a Large Language Model-Based Feedback System for Case Report Writing in Rehabilitation Education: Tutorial.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- When Intuition Meets the Algorithm: Medico-Legal Implications of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Decision-Making in Orthopedics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Defining the Boundaries of AI Use in Scientific Writing: A Comparative Review of Editorial Policies.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Review
- The Ability of ChatGPT in Paraphrasing Texts and Reducing Plagiarism: A Descriptive Analysis.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping reviewJournal of educational evaluation for health professions · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ChatGPT is a chatbot built on a natural language processing model which can generate human-like responses to prompts given to it. Despite its lack of domain-specific training, ChatGPT has developed remarkable accuracy in interpreting clinical information. In this article, we aim to assess what role ChatGPT can serve in medical writing. We recruited a first-year medical student with no prior experience in writing case reports to write a case report on a complex surgery with the assistance of ChatGPT. After a thorough evaluation of its responses, we believe that ChatGPT is a powerful medical writing tool that can be used to generate summaries, proofread, and provide valuable medical insight. However, ChatGPT is not a substitute for a study author due to several significant limitations, and should instead be used in conjunction with the author during the writing process. As the impact of natural language processing models such as ChatGPT grows, we suggest that guidelines be established on how to better utilize this technology to improve clinical research rather than outright prohibiting its usage.
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.