ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025
Using Large Language Models to Enhance Exercise Recommendations and Physical Activity in Clinical and Healthy Populations: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine Learning for the Analysis of Healthy Lifestyle Data: Scoping Review and Guidelines.JMIR human factors · 2026Guideline
- Explainability and Human Oversight for AI-Generated Exercise Guidance in Digital Healthcare: A Governance-Oriented Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- AI-Generated Exercise Prescriptions for At-Risk Populations: Safety and Feasibility of a Large Language Model Assessed by Expert Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Professional Expertise in Adapted Physical Activity Prescription for Orthopedic Rehabilitation.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- Personalised health plan development using agentic AI in Singapore's national preventive care programme: a pilot study.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- The AI recommendation paradox: a systematic review evaluating the promise, peril, and path forward for large language models in exercise recommendation.Biology of sport · 2026Review
- ChatGPT-generated rehabilitation programs in sports physiotherapy: an expert evaluation and a mixed-methods study of clinical applicability.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Generative artificial intelligence and large language models in sports medicine: a scoping review of applications, accuracy, and ethical implications.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Systematic review of dynamically tailored eHealth interventions targeting physical activity and healthy diet in chronic disease.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating Large Language Models and Retrieval-Augmented Generation Enhancement for Delivering Guideline-Adherent Nutrition Information for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Leveraging GPT-4o for Automated Extraction and Categorization of CAD-RADS Features From Free-Text Coronary CT Angiography Reports: Diagnostic Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- AI-Powered Building Ecosystems: A Narrative Mapping Review on the Integration of Digital Twins and LLMs for Proactive Comfort, IEQ, and Energy Management.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Regular exercise recommendations (ERs) and physical activity (PA) are crucial for the prevention and management of chronic diseases. However, creating effective exercise programs demand substantial time and specialized expertise from both medical and sports professionals. Large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, offer a promising solution by helping create personalized ERs. While LLMs show potential, their use in exercise planning remains in its early stages and requires further exploration. objectives: This study aims to systematically review and classify the applications of LLMs in ERs and PA. It also seeks to identify existing gaps and provide insights into future research directions for optimizing LLM integration in personalized health interventions. Methods: A scoping review methodology was used to identify studies related to LLM applications in ERs and PA. Literature searches were conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, IEEE, and arXiv for English language papers published up to March 21, 2024. Keywords included LLMs, chatbots, ERs, PA, fitness plan, and related terms. Two independent reviewers (XL and CH) screened and selected studies based on predefined inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis was used to synthesize findings, which were presented narratively. Results: An initial search identified 598 papers, of which 1.8% (11/598) of studies were included after screening and applying selection criteria. Of these, ChatGPT-based models were used in 55% (6/11) of the studies. In addition, 73% (8/11) of the studies used expert evaluations and user feedback to assess model usability, and 45% (5/11) of the studies used experimental designs to evaluate LLM interventions in ERs and PA. Key findings indicated that LLMs can generate tailored ERs, save time in clinical practice, and enhance safety by incorporating patient-specific data. They also increased engagement and supported behavior change. This made PA guidance more accessible, especially in remote or underserved communities. Conclusions: This review highlights the promising applications of LLMs in ERs and PA but emphasizes that they remain a supplement to human expertise. Expert validation is essential to ensure safety and mitigate risks. Future research should prioritize pilot testing, clinician training programs, and large-scale clinical trials to enhance feasibility, transparency, and ethical integration.
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.