Logo-hpp
2022: Two-year Impact Factor: 4.4
Scopus Journal Metrics
CiteScore (2022): 5.3
SNIP(2022):1.389
SJR(2022): 0.78
Platinum
Open Access

Health Promot Perspect. 2023;13(3): 183-191.
doi: 10.34172/hpp.2023.22
PMID: 37808939
PMCID: PMC10558973
  Abstract View: 1192
  PDF Download: 992
  Full Text View: 216

Systematic Review

Exploring the role of ChatGPT in patient care (diagnosis and treatment) and medical research: A systematic review

Ravindra Kumar Garg 1* ORCID logo, Vijeth L Urs 1, Akshay Anand Agarwal 2, Sarvesh Kumar Chaudhary 1, Vimal Paliwal 3, Sujita Kumar Kar 4

1 Department of Neurology, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
2 Department of Surgery, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
3 Department of Neurology, Sanjay Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India
4 Department of Psychiatry, King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India
*Corresponding Author: Ravindra Kumar Garg, Email: garg50@yahoo.com

Abstract

Background: ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence based tool developed by OpenAI (California, USA). This systematic review examines the potential of ChatGPT in patient care and its role in medical research.

Methods: The systematic review was done according to the PRISMA guidelines. Embase, Scopus, PubMed and Google Scholar data bases were searched. We also searched preprint data bases. Our search was aimed to identify all kinds of publications, without any restrictions, on ChatGPT and its application in medical research, medical publishing and patient care. We used search term “ChatGPT”. We reviewed all kinds of publications including original articles, reviews, editorial/ commentaries, and even letter to the editor. Each selected records were analysed using ChatGPT and responses generated were compiled in a table. The word table was transformed in to a PDF and was further analysed using ChatPDF.

Results: We reviewed full texts of 118 articles. ChatGPT can assist with patient enquiries, note writing, decision-making, trial enrolment, data management, decision support, research support, and patient education. But the solutions it offers are usually insufficient and contradictory, raising questions about their originality, privacy, correctness, bias, and legality. Due to its lack of human-like qualities, ChatGPT’s legitimacy as an author is questioned when used for academic writing. ChatGPT generated contents have concerns with bias and possible plagiarism.

Conclusion: Although it can help with patient treatment and research, there are issues with accuracy, authorship, and bias. ChatGPT can serve as a “clinical assistant” and be a help in research and scholarly writing.

First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Comments
Security code


Abstract View: 1193

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


PDF Download: 992

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


Full Text View: 216

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

Submitted: 14 Jun 2023
Revision: 05 Jul 2023
Accepted: 06 Jul 2023
ePublished: 11 Sep 2023
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)