ReviewHealth science reports2025
Advantages and Limitations of ChatGPT in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.
Review in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence and chatbots in general surgery: a survey among surgeons in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Applying Cognitive Load Theory to Improve Instructional Efficiency and Learner Experience in Current Good Manufacturing Practices Training for Pharmacists.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluating ChatGPT-5 for Detection of Barrett's Esophagus and Grading of Esophagitis: A Multiclass Endoscopic Image Analysis.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Article
- Acceptance and use of GenAI among medical and health sciences students in Saudi Arabia: an extended TAM study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- IFSO Survey: Use of Large Language Models (LLMs) by Metabolic Bariatric Surgeons and Integrated Health Professionals.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the Accuracy, Usefulness, and Safety of ChatGPT for Caregivers Seeking Information on Congenital Muscular Torticollis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Internship Learning Experiences, Challenges, and Resource Preferences Among Junior Doctors in Two Malaysian Tertiary Hospitals: A Pilot Study on the Preliminary Validation of a Multifaceted Questionnaire.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- ChatGPT in medical education: a cross-sectional analysis of usage, attitudes, perceptions, and practices among Saudi medical students.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Feasibility of a multi-metric framework for evaluating patient-facing AI communication in cosmetic dentistry: an exploratory proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Speech and Language Therapy: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Clinical Applications and Outcomes.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
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
Background and Aims: ChatGPT, an AI language model developed by OpenAI, has emerged as a transformative tool in the healthcare sector. Its ability to process vast amounts of medical data and generate human-like responses offers significant potential for enhancing patient engagement and supporting healthcare professionals. However, despite its advantages, there are significant limitations. This scoping review aims to critically evaluate both the advantages and limitations associated with integrating ChatGPT into healthcare. Methods: In this scoping review, we searched for the original articles published in online databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar) from January 1, 2020, to May 30, 2023 using relevant keywords ("ChatGPT," "Health," "Advantage," and "Limitation") in English language. Data collection was done using a researcher's checklist using Excel version 2019 software. Results: Out of 4982 articles found, 28 articles were included in the study. All articles were conducted in 2023. The type of study in more than half of the articles was cross-sectional. Advantages and limitations extracted from the studies were grouped into eight and nine categories, respectively. The most common advantages were "Clinical Decision Support (CDS)" and "improved medical education," which included enhanced teaching methods and curriculum development. Specific benefits in medical education were comprehensive drug counseling, understanding of radiation oncology, and predicting drug-drug interactions. Research assistance benefits were also notable, such as facilitating data analysis, selecting strong research ideas, and aiding in academic writing. The most frequent limitations were "knowledge limitations and accuracy" and "reliability." Conclusion: This scoping review has provided a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and limitations of ChatGPT in the healthcare sector. While the model shows significant promise in enhancing CDS and improving medical education, it is essential to remain vigilant about its limitations, particularly concerning knowledge accuracy and reliability.
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.