The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatGPT: Implications for Faculty, Students, and Patients: May 19, 2023
Open accessAbstract
The scientific discipline of artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved so rapidly in recent years that it prompted introduction of the 2020 National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act by the US Congress to study its current and future impact.Although there appears to be no singular definition for AI, the US Department of State defines it as "a machine-based system that can, for a given set of humandefined objectives, make predictions, recommendations or decisions influencing real or virtual environments." 1 Artificial intelligence has been deployed recently within the healthcare and education domains, making it imperative for nursing educators to understand its potential applications and limitations.2,3 Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT) is an AI large language model developed by OpenAI 4 and released to the public in November 2022.ChatGPT uses natural language processing through neural networks to generate human-like text responses to user queries.3,5 ChatGPT has demonstrated its power by passing law school examinations, the US Medical Licensing Examination, and producing full H&P (history and physical) notes and SOAP (subjective, objective, assessment, and plan) notes, helping make it the fastest-growing user application in history.2,3 These capabilities, however, have implications for both students and educators.
Overview
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
“Quality assurance gaps included a lack of verification standards and risks of generating inaccurate content, requiring stringent controls and validation protocols”
From Patterns, advances, and gaps in using ChatGPT and similar technologies in nursing education: A PAGER scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as Shay, 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Integration difficulties and system compatibility issues added complexity to implementation”
From Patterns, advances, and gaps in using ChatGPT and similar technologies in nursing education: A PAGER scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as Shay, 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Sallam, M. (2023) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare11060887 · Cited by 3,126
What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature
Lo, C. K. (2023) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci13040410 · Cited by 2,024
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) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4352931 · Cited by 708
The ChatGPT Storm and What Faculty Can Do
Sun, G. H., & Hoelscher, S. H. (2023) · Nurse Educator · doi:10.1097/nne.0000000000001390 · Cited by 305
The state of artificial intelligence in nursing education: past, present, and future directions
De Gagne, J. C. (2023) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph20064884 · Cited by 191
Choi, E. P. H., Lee, J. J., Ho, M.-H., Kwok, J. Y. Y., & Lok, K. Y. W. (2023) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105796 · Cited by 172
(2023) · doi:10.1111/nin.12556 · Cited by 105
Sallam, M. (2023) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202302.0356.v1 · Cited by 39
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 2023, Will ChatGPT undermine ethical values in nursing education, research, and practice?, Nurs Inq, e12556
- 2023, ChatGTP: what is it and how can nursing and health science education use it?, J Adv Nurs
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Gunawan, J., Aungsuroch, Y., & Montayre, J. (2024) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2024.106323 · Cited by 90
Amankwaa, I., Ekpor, E., Cudjoe, D., Kobiah, E., Fuseini, A.-K. J., Diebieri, M., Gyamfi, S., & Brownie, S. (2025) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2025.106822 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Shay, A.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shay, Amy
- ORCID
- Shay, Amy
- Venue
- Clinical Nurse Specialist
- Published
- 2023-09
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 245-246
- ISSN
- 0887-6274 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-9782
- OpenAlex
- W4385975889
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 0.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Clinical Nurse Specialist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, large language models, artificial intelligence in education, nursing education, nursing students, artificial intelligence in healthcare, natural language processing, medical licensing examinations
- MeSH terms
- Faculty, Humans, Patients, Students
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
