ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Artificial intelligence in cancer survivorship: evaluating ChatGPT's performance in rehabilitation-related queries.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Therapeutic potential and mechanisms of rehabilitation interventions in preventing cancer metastasis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT in responding to patient-centered queries related to cancer rehabilitation. It examined the accuracy, completeness, and overall quality of ChatGPT's responses across major domains of cancer rehabilitation from a physical therapy perspective.
methodsFifteen representative patient queries covering eight domains of cancer rehabilitation-including general exercise, fatigue, bone metastasis, neuropathy, balance and falls, breast cancer, women's health, and pediatric cancer-were developed by two licensed physical therapists. Each query was input into ChatGPT-4, and responses were independently evaluated for accuracy, completeness, and global quality based on established clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus.
resultsChatGPT demonstrated a mean accuracy score of 3.93 (SD = 1.10) on a 5-point scale, a mean completeness score of 2.13 (SD = 0.83) on a 3-point scale, and a mean global quality score of 3.60 (SD = 1.12) on a 5-point scale. Responses were generally accurate and clinically relevant but often lacked details regarding exercise dosage, safety precautions, and guideline-concordant recommendations.
conclusionChatGPT shows potential as an accessible tool for general cancer rehabilitation education but requires refinement to ensure accuracy, contextual relevance, and safety. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: AI-driven conversational models may improve patient access to rehabilitation information and self-management support when used under professional oversight and guided by evidence-based frameworks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41998423What 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.