The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatGPT: evolution or revolution?
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These case studies discouraged the use of ChatGPT, citing the lack of scientific accuracy, the limited updated knowledge, and the lack of ability to critically discuss the results [38,49,50].”
From ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns (2023) · cites this paper as [38]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Fifth, the risk of research fraud (e.g., ghostwriting, falsified or fake research) involving ChatGPT should be considered seriously [23,37,38,66,72,79]”
From ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns (2023) · cites this paper as [38]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Sixth, legal issues in relation to ChatGPT use were also raised by several records including copyright issues [14,38,44,55,79].”
From ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns (2023) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“However, the text generated in the software may be sourced from texts that are from textbooks, magazines, scientific journals, or other Internet sources.”
From Using ChatGPT for writing articles for patients' education for dermatological diseases: A pilot study (2023) · cites this paper as [3]
In the citing paper
“Many scientific journals are questioning the policy matter, publishing editorials on the topic, and updating author’s guidelines (51).”
From ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health (2023) · cites this paper as [51]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
AI bot ChatGPT writes smart essays — should professors worry?
Stokel-Walker, C. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04397-7 · Cited by 543
Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Models
Weidinger, L., Mellor, J., Rauh, M., Griffin, C., Uesato, J., Huang, P.-S., Cheng, M., Glaese, M., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2112.04359 · Cited by 477
Are ChatGPT and AlphaCode going to replace programmers?
Castelvecchi, D. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04383-z · Cited by 138
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sallam, M. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11060887 · Cited by 3,126
Dave, T., Athaluri, S. A., & Singh, S. (2023) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2023.1169595 · Cited by 1,204
Cascella, M., Montomoli, J., Bellini, V., & Bignami, E. (2023) · Journal of Medical Systems · doi:10.1007/s10916-023-01925-4 · Cited by 1,120
Haleem, A., Javaid, M., & Singh, R. P. (2022) · BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations · doi:10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100089 · Cited by 694
ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health
De Angelis, L., Baglivo, F., Arzilli, G., Privitera, G. P., Ferragina, P., Tozzi, A. E., & Rizzo, C. (2023) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1166120 · Cited by 708
Metadata
- Authors
- Gordijn, B., & Have, H. T.
- Affiliations
- Dublin City University (IE)
- Duquesne University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gordijn, Bert
- Venue
- Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
- Published
- 2023-01-19
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-2
- ISSN
- 1386-7423 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-8633
- OpenAlex
- W4317435136
- Cited by
- 317
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 131 · 2023: 117
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Medicine Health Care and Philosophy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, large language models, artificial intelligence, generative AI, medical education, future of medicine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
