ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2023
A SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) Analysis of ChatGPT in the Medical Literature: Concise Review.
Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Performance of ChatGPT Across Different Versions in Medical Licensing Examinations Worldwide: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring the role of ChatGPT in patient care (diagnosis and treatment) and medical research: A systematic review.Health promotion perspectives · 2023Pooled it
- Exploring the Application Capability of ChatGPT as an Instructor in Skills Education for Dental Medical Students: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Large Language Models in German Continuing Medical Education Assessments: Protocol for a Fully Crossed Experimental Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Perioperative Risk Stratification with AI-Powered Chatbots: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- ChatGPT's performance in sample size estimation: a preliminary study on the capabilities of artificial intelligence.Family practice · 2025Article
- Using Artificial Intelligence ChatGPT to Access Medical Information About Chemical Eye Injuries: Comparative Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- ChatGPT Provides Accurate but Incomplete Responses and Reliably Adjusts Readability to Prompts for Hamstring Injury Frequently Asked Questions.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Large Language Models in Medical Diagnostics: Scoping Review With Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Use of AI in Family Medicine Publications: A Joint Editorial from Journal Editors.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025Article
- Article
- Insights Into the Future: Assessing Medical Students' Artificial Intelligence Readiness - A Cross-Sectional Study at Kerman University of Medical Sciences (2022).Health science reports · 2025Article
- Prospects and perils of ChatGPT in diabetes.World journal of diabetes · 2025Article
- ChatGPT for Univariate Statistics: Validation of AI-Assisted Data Analysis in Healthcare Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- ChatGPT-4 Performance on German Continuing Medical Education-Friend or Foe (Trick or Treat)? Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Use of AI in Family Medicine Publications: A Joint Editorial From Journal Editors.Annals of family medicine · 2025Article
- Use of AI in family medicine publications: a joint editorial from journal editors.Family medicine and community health · 2025Article
- Use of AI in Family Medicine Publications: A Joint Editorial From Journal Editors.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2025Article
- Case Report: Intranasal esketamine combined with a form of generative artificial intelligence in the management of treatment-resistant depression.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of generative artificial intelligence: a qualitative study of undergraduate nursing students.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChatGPT is a 175-billion-parameter natural language processing model that is already involved in scientific content and publications. Its influence ranges from providing quick access to information on medical topics, assisting in generating medical and scientific articles and papers, performing medical data analyses, and even interpreting complex data sets.
objectiveThe future role of ChatGPT remains uncertain and a matter of debate already shortly after its release. This review aimed to analyze the role of ChatGPT in the medical literature during the first 3 months after its release.
methodsWe performed a concise review of literature published in PubMed from December 1, 2022, to March 31, 2023. To find all publications related to ChatGPT or considering ChatGPT, the search term was kept simple ("ChatGPT" in AllFields). All publications available as full text in German or English were included. All accessible publications were evaluated according to specifications by the author team (eg, impact factor, publication modus, article type, publication speed, and type of ChatGPT integration or content). The conclusions of the articles were used for later SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. All data were analyzed on a descriptive basis.
resultsOf 178 studies in total, 160 met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated. The average impact factor was 4.423 (range 0-96.216), and the average publication speed was 16 (range 0-83) days. Among the articles, there were 77 editorials (48,1%), 43 essays (26.9%), 21 studies (13.1%), 6 reviews (3.8%), 6 case reports (3.8%), 6 news (3.8%), and 1 meta-analysis (0.6%). Of those, 54.4% (n=87) were published as open access, with 5% (n=8) provided on preprint servers. Over 400 quotes with information on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats were detected. By far, most (n=142, 34.8%) were related to weaknesses. ChatGPT excels in its ability to express ideas clearly and formulate general contexts comprehensibly. It performs so well that even experts in the field have difficulty identifying abstracts generated by ChatGPT. However, the time-limited scope and the need for corrections by experts were mentioned as weaknesses and threats of ChatGPT. Opportunities include assistance in formulating medical issues for nonnative English speakers, as well as the possibility of timely participation in the development of such artificial intelligence tools since it is in its early stages and can therefore still be influenced.
conclusionsArtificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT are already part of the medical publishing landscape. Despite their apparent opportunities, policies and guidelines must be implemented to ensure benefits in education, clinical practice, and research and protect against threats such as scientific misconduct, plagiarism, and inaccuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.