Exploring the Role of Chat GPT in patient care (diagnosis and Treatment) and medical research: A Systematic Review
Garg, R. K.; Urs, V. L.; Agrawal, A. A.; Chaudhary, S. K.; Paliwal, V.; Kar, S. K.
Show abstract
BackgroundChatGPT(Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) is an artificial intelligence (AI) based on a natural language processing tool developed by OpenAI (California, USA). This systematic review examines the potential of Chat GPT in diagnosing and treating patients and its contributions to medical research. MethodsIn order to locate articles on ChatGPTs use in clinical practise and medical research, this systematic review used PRISMA standards and conducted database searches across several sources. Selected records were analysed using ChatGPT, which also produced a summary for each article. The resultant word document was transformed to a PDF and handled using ChatPDF. The review looked at topics pertaining to scholarly publishing, clinical practise, and medical research. ResultsWe reviewed 118 publications. There are difficulties and moral conundrums associated with using ChatGPT in therapeutic settings and medical research. Patient inquiries, note writing, decision-making, trial enrolment, data management, decision support, research support, and patient education are all things that ChatGPT can help with. However, the solutions it provides are frequently inadequate and inconsistent, presenting issues with its originality, privacy, accuracy, bias, and legality. When utilising ChatGPT for academic writings, there are issues with prejudice and plagiarism, and because it lacks human-like characteristics, its authority as an author is called into question. ConclusionsChatGPT has limitations when used in research and healthcare. Even while it aids in patient treatment, concerns regarding accuracy, authorship, and bias arise. Currently, ChatGPT can serve as a "clinical assistant" and be a huge assistance with research and scholarly writing.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Network Graph Representation of COVID-19 Scientific Publications to Aid Knowledge Discovery 93%
- Cracking the Code: A Scoping Review to Unite Disciplines in Tackling Legal Issues in Health Artificial Intelligence 92%
- Connecting Artificial Intelligence and Primary Care Challenges: Findings from a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative Consultation 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 Studies: Discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation 94%
- GPT for RCTs?: Using AI to measure adherence to reporting guidelines 93%
- Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open-access publishing each year 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transparency in peer review: Exploring the content and tone of reviewers' confidential comments to editors 94%
- Investigating the Nature of Open Science Practices Across Complementary, Alternative, and Integrative Medicine Journals: An Audit 94%
- Introducing the EMPIRE Index: A novel, value-based metric framework to measure the impact of medical publications 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.