ChatGPT: When Artificial Intelligence Replaces the Rheumatologist in Medical Writing
Open accessAbstract
In this editorial we discuss the place of artificial intelligence (AI) in the writing of scientific articles and especially editorials. We asked chatGPT « to write an editorial for Annals of Rheumatic Diseases about how AI may replace the rheumatologist in editorial writing ». chatGPT9s response is diplomatic and describes AI as a tool to help the rheumatologist but not replace him. AI is already used in medicine, especially in image analysis, but the domains are infinite and it is possible that AI could quickly help or replace rheumatologists in the writing of scientific articles. We discuss the ethical aspects and the future role of rheumatologists.
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
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?
Not disclosing LLMs, especially those which provide context-specific suggestions and can generate or substantially affect content, violates norms of ethical attribution because it results in giving undue credit to human contributors for work which they did not do.
“With respect to fair allocation of credit, not disclosing LLMs, especially those which provide context-specific suggestions and can generate or substantially affect content, violates norms of ethical attribution because it results in giving undue credit to (human) contributors for work which they did not do (Verhoeven et al., 2023).”
From The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts (2023) · cites this paper as Verhoeven et al., 2023
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredChatGPT has the ability to analyse and generate descriptions for medical images, which can enhance the workflow of radiologists.
“The potential of ChatGPT lies in its ability to analyse and generate descriptions for medical images, which can enhance the workflow of radiologists.”
ChatGPT can provide initial observations that highlight regions of interest and assist radiologists in their analyses.
“It has the ability to provide initial observations, which can highlight regions of interest and assist radiologists in their analyses [13,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Else, H. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-023-00056-7 · Cited by 611 · see citing works
Machine Learning Solutions for Osteoporosis—A Review
Smets, J., Shevroja, E., Hügle, T., Leslie, W. D., & Hans, D. B. (2020) · Journal of Bone and Mineral Research · doi:10.1002/jbmr.4292 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
Daily briefing: will ChatGPT kill the essay assignment?
Graham, F. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-022-04437-2 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Lin, K. Y. Y., Peng, C., Lee, K. H., Chan, S. C. W., & Chung, H. Y. (2022) · Lara D. Veeken · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keac059 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence and the future of radiographic scoring in rheumatoid arthritis: a viewpoint
Bird, A., Oakden‐Rayner, L., McMaster, C., Smith, L., Zeng, M., Wechalekar, M. D., Ray, S., Proudman, S., & Palmer, L. J. (2022) · Arthritis Research & Therapy · doi:10.1186/s13075-022-02972-x · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Kedra, J., Radstake, T. R. D. J., Pandit, A., Baraliakos, X., Berenbaum, F., Finckh, A., Fautrel, B., Stamm, T., Gómez-Cabrero, D., Pristipino, C., et al. (2019) · RMD Open · doi:10.1136/rmdopen-2019-001004 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Big Data and artificial intelligence: Will they change our practice?
Kedra, J., & Gossec, L. (2019) · Joint Bone Spine · doi:10.1016/j.jbspin.2019.09.001 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Bouget, V., Duquesne, J., Hassler, S., Cournède, P.-H., Fautrel, B., Guillemin, F., Pallardy, M., Broët, P., Mariette, X., & Bitoun, S. (2022) · RMD Open · doi:10.1136/rmdopen-2022-002442 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Emerging role of eHealth in the identification of very early inflammatory rheumatic diseases
Kataria, S., & Ravindran, V. K. (2019) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology · doi:10.1016/j.berh.2019.101429 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Jansen, M. P., Salzlechner, C., Barnes, E., DiFranco, M. D., Custers, R. J. H., Watt, F. E., Vincent, T. L., & Mastbergen, S. C. (2022) · Lara D. Veeken · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keac723 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Poddubnyy, D., Proft, F. N., Hermann, K., et al. (2021) · Lara D. Veeken · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keab636 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Imran, M., & Almusharraf, N. (2023) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/13605 · Cited by 421 · see citing works
The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts
Hosseini, M., Resnik, D. B., & Holmes, K. (2023) · Research Ethics · doi:10.1177/17470161231180449 · Cited by 253 · see citing works
Younis, H. A., Eisa, T. A. E., Nasser, M., Sahib, T. M., Noor, A. A., Alyasiri, O. M., Salisu, S., Hayder, I. M., & Younis, H. A. (2024) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics14010109 · Cited by 242 · see citing works
A scoping review of ChatGPT's role in healthcare education and research
Shorey, S., Mattar, C., Pereira, T. L.-B., & Choolani, M. (2024) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2024.106121 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
ChatGPT applications in Academic Research: A Review of Benefits, Concerns, and Recommendations
AlZaabi, A., ALAmri, A., Albalushi, H., Aljabri, R., & AalAbdulsalam, A. (2023) · doi:10.1101/2023.08.17.553688 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Hueber, A. J., & Kleyer, A. (2023) · RMD Open · doi:10.1136/rmdopen-2023-003248 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
- Authors
- Verhoeven, F., Wendling, D., & Prati, C.
- Affiliations
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Prati, Clément
- Venue
- Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-08
- Volume
- 82
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1015-1017
- ISSN
- 0003-4967 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10359572
- OpenAlex
- W4364374804
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, scientific writing, editorial writing, rheumatology, AI ethics, AI-generated text, medical writing
- MeSH terms
- Rheumatologists, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Male, Rheumatic Diseases, Medical Writing
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
