Cited by 244Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence ApplicationsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Generative artificial intelligence in healthcare: A scoping review on benefits, challenges and applications

Moulaei, Khadijeh, Yadegari, Atiye, Baharestani, Mahdi, Farzanbakhsh, Shayan, Sabet, Babak, Reza Afrash, Mohammad·2024·International Journal of Medical Informatics

Abstract

Background Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) is revolutionizing healthcare with solutions for complex challenges, enhancing diagnosis, treatment, and care through new data and insights. However, its integration raises questions about applications, benefits, and challenges. Our study explores these aspects, offering an overview of GAI's applications and future prospects in healthcare. Methods This scoping review searched Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus . The selection of studies involved screening titles, reviewing abstracts, and examining full texts, adhering to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines throughout the process. Results From 1406 articles across three databases, 109 met inclusion criteria after screening and deduplication. Nine GAI models were utilized in healthcare, with ChatGPT (n = 102, 74 %), Google Bard (Gemini) (n = 16, 11 %), and Microsoft Bing AI (n = 10, 7 %) being the most frequently employed. A total of 24 different applications of GAI in healthcare were identified, with the most common being "offering insights and information on health conditions through answering questions" (n = 41) and "diagnosis and prediction of diseases" (n = 17). In total, 606 benefits and challenges were identified, which were condensed to 48 benefits and 61 challenges after consolidation. The predominant benefits included "Providing rapid access to information and valuable insights" and "Improving prediction and diagnosis accuracy", while the primary challenges comprised "generati…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105474

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 122 · Cited by 244

Authors
Moulaei, K., Yadegari, A., Baharestani, M., Farzanbakhsh, S., Sabet, B., & Reza Afrash, M.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Ilam (IR)
  • Hamedan University of Medical Sciences (IR)
  • Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (IR)
  • Shahid Beheshti University (IR)
Venue
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-08
Volume
188
Pages
105474
ISSN
1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4396742745
Cited by
244
References
122
Citations by year
2026: 105 · 2025: 107 · 2024: 32
FWCI
5.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
generative AI, medical applications, ChatGPT, disease diagnosis, disease prediction, benefits and challenges, large language models, medical question answering
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Delivery of Health Care, Humans

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