Cited by 10Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AIArtificial Intelligence in Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 9 of the 27 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Stench of Errors or the Shine of Potential: The Challenge of (Ir)Responsible Use of ChatGPT in Speech‐Language Pathology

Open access
Hanna, Mytsyk, Yana, Suchikova·2025·International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders

Abstract

Background: Integrating large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, into speech‐language pathology (SLP) presents promising opportunities and notable challenges. While these tools can support diagnostics, streamline documentation and assist in therapy planning, they also raise concerns related to misinformation, cultural insensitivity, overreliance and ethical ambiguity. Current discourse often centres on technological capabilities, overlooking how future speech‐language pathologists (SLPs) are being prepared to use such tools responsibly. Aims: This paper examines the pedagogical, ethical and professional implications of integrating LLMs into SLP. It emphasizes the need to cultivate professional responsibility, ethical awareness and critical engagement amongst student SLPs, ensuring that such technologies are applied thoughtfully, appropriately and in accordance with evidence‐based and contextually relevant therapeutic standards. Methods: The paper combines a review of recent interdisciplinary research with reflective insights from academic practice. It presents documented cases of student SLPs’ overreliance on ChatGPT, analyzes common pitfalls through a structured table of examples and synthesizes perspectives from SLP, education, data ethics and linguistics. Main Contribution: Reflective examples presented in the article illustrate challenges that arise when LLMs are used without sufficient oversight or a clear understanding of their limitations. Rather than questioning the value of LLMs, these cases emphasize the importance of ensuring that student SLPs are guided towards thoughtful, ethical and clinically sound use. To support this, the paper offers a set of pedagogical recommendations—including ethics integration, reflective assignments, case‐based learning, peer critique and interdisciplinary collaboration—aimed at embedding critical engagement with tools such as ChatGPT into professional training. Conclusions: LLMs are becoming an integral part of SLP. Their impact, however, will depend on how effectively student SLPs are trained to balance technological innovation with professional responsibility. Higher education institutions (HEIs) must take an active role in embedding responsible engagement with LLMs into pre‐service training and SLP curricula. Through intentional and early preparation, the field can move beyond the risks associated with automation and towards a future shaped by reflective, informed and ethically grounded use of generative tools. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject Large language models (LLMs), including ChatGPT, are increasingly used in speech‐language pathology (SLP) for tasks such as diagnostic support, therapy material generation and documentation. While prior research acknowledges both their utility and risks, limited attention has been paid to how student SLPs engage with these tools and how educational institutions prepare them for responsible use. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This paper identifies key challenges in how student SLPs interact with ChatGPT, including overreliance, lack of critical evaluation and ethical blind spots. It emphasizes the role of higher education in developing critical AI literacy aligned with clinical and ethical standards. The study offers specific, practice‐oriented recommendations for embedding responsibility‐focused engagement with LLMs into SLP curricula. These include ethics integration, reflective assignments, peer feedback and interdisciplinary dialogue. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Without structured guidance, future SLPs may misuse LLMs in ways that compromise diagnostic accuracy, cultural appropriateness or therapeutic quality. Embedding reflective, ethics‐focused training into SLP curricula can reduce these risks and ensure that generative tools like ChatGPT support rather than undermine clinical decision‐making and patient care.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1460-6984.70088

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

13 Own interpretation · 7 No full text of the sources · 6 Supported · 4 Sources not found · 3 Partly supported · 2 Not checked yet · 1 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 10
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 17

Create a free account to see these claims.

Create a free account to see these assumptions.

8 more claims

Create a free account to see all 36 claims and every source verdict.

See all claims — free account

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Du Y. andF.Juefei‐Xu.2023. “Generative AI for Therapy? Opportunities and Barriers for ChatGPT in Speech‐Language Therapy ” paper presented atThe Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations Kigali Rwanda November 1—5 2023. URL:https://openreview.net/pdf?id=cRZSr6Tpr1S.
  2. 10.21153/jtlge2025 · DOI

Cited by

See all 10

Metadata

Authors
Hanna, M., & Yana, S.
Affiliations
Department of Applied Psychology and Speech Therapy Berdyansk State Pedagogical University Zaporizhzhia Ukraine
Venue
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-07
Volume
60
Issue
4
Pages
e70088-e70088
ISSN
  • 1368-2822 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-6984
OpenAlex
W4412107513
Cited by
10
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
ChatGPT, large language models, speech-language pathology education, responsible AI use, professional responsibility, ethics education, overreliance on AI, pedagogical recommendations, case-based learning, peer critique, data ethics, misinformation, cultural insensitivity, clinical documentation, treatment planning, diagnostic support
MeSH terms
Generative Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Speech-Language Pathology

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stench of Errors or the Shine of Potential: The Challenge of (Ir)Responsible Use of ChatGPT in Speech‐Language Pathology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1460-6984.70088
The paper
Hanna, M., & Yana, S. (2025). Stench of Errors or the Shine of Potential: The Challenge of (Ir)Responsible Use of ChatGPT in Speech‐Language Pathology. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.70088