Can ChatGPT be trusted to provide reliable estimates?
Abstract
Dear Accountability in Research Editors,We support Hosseini, Rasmussen, and Resnik (2023). regarding the risks associated with text written by artificial intelligence (AI), such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT...
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
These concerns were positively associated with questioning the credibility of AI Chatbots and a lack of comfort in using them in medical practice.
“These concerns were positively associated with questioning the credibility of AI Chatbots and a lack of comfort in using them in medical practice [33].”
From ChatGPT and the Future of Digital Health: A Study on Healthcare Workers’ Perceptions and Expectations (2023) · cites this paper as [33]
Cites
Changes in the global value of ecosystem services
Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Sutton, P., van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S. J., Kubiszewski, I., Farber, S., & Turner, R. K. (2014) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002 · Cited by 6,322 · see citing works
Estimating the volume and age of water stored in global lakes using a geo-statistical approach
Messager, M. L., Lehner, B., Grill, G., Nedeva, I., & Schmitt, O. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms13603 · Cited by 1,779 · see citing works
A global inventory of lakes based on high-resolution satellite imagery
Verpoorter, C., Kutser, T., Seekell, D. A., & Tranvik, L. J. (2014) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1002/2014gl060641 · Cited by 1,504 · see citing works
Using AI to write scholarly publications
Hosseini, M., Rasmussen, L. M., & Resnik, D. B. (2024) · Accountability in Research · doi:10.1080/08989621.2023.2168535 · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Larger and more instructable language models become less reliable
Zhou, L., Schellaert, W., Martínez-Plumed, F., Moros-Daval, Y., Ferri, C., & Hernández-Orallo, J. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07930-y · Cited by 203 · see citing works
Temsah, M.-H., Aljamaan, F., Malki, K. H., Alhasan, K., Altamimi, I., Aljarbou, R., Bazuhair, F., Alsubaihin, A., Abdulmajeed, N., Alshahrani, F. S., et al. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11131812 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
AI detecting AI in academic writing: Why most AI detector findings are false
Tsigaris, P., & Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2026) · Next Research · doi:10.1016/j.nexres.2026.101396 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Tsigaris, P., & Teixeira da Silva, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Thompson Rivers University (CA)
- Independent researcher, Ikenobe, Japan
- Corresponding author
- Tsigaris, Panagiotis
- ORCID
- Tsigaris, Panagiotis
- Venue
- Accountability in Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2023-02-21
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 973-975
- ISSN
- 0898-9621 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-5815
- OpenAlex
- W4320710261
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Accountability in Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- no funding
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, artificial intelligence, trustworthiness, research integrity, AI-generated research
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Trust
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
