ChatGPT and Large Language Models (LLMs) in Healthcare: Opportunities and Risks
Open accessAbstract
We review the potential applications of ChatGPT in healthcare and also identify potentials risks that must be addressed before ChatGPT and other LLM tools can be safely adopted in healthcare.
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?
Two sources suggest that LLM-supported diagnoses hamper the process of providing adequate justification due to their opacity.
“With regard to transparency, two sources suggest that LLM-supported diagnoses hamper the process of providing adequate justification due to their opacity36,74.”
From The ethics of ChatGPT in medicine and healthcare: a systematic review on large language models (LLMs) (2024) · cites this paper as [36]
The economic model can have negative downstream effects on accessibility and affordability.
“This economic model, as highlighted by several studies, can have negative downstream effects on accessibility and affordability24,36,43.”
From The ethics of ChatGPT in medicine and healthcare: a systematic review on large language models (LLMs) (2024) · cites this paper as [36]
The profit-driven nature of the field can lead to concentrations of power among a limited number of companies and a lack of transparency.
“The profit-driven nature of the field can lead to concentrations of power among a limited number of companies and a lack of transparency.”
From The ethics of ChatGPT in medicine and healthcare: a systematic review on large language models (LLMs) (2024) · cites this paper as [36]
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
Kung, T. H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., De Leon, L., Elepaño, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao, R., Diaz-Candido, G., Maningo, J., et al. (2023) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198 · Cited by 4,115 · see citing works
ChatGPT: the future of discharge summaries?
Patel, S. B., & Lam, K. (2023) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(23)00021-3 · Cited by 728 · see citing works
ChatGPT makes medicine easy to swallow: an exploratory case study on simplified radiology reports
Jeblick, K., Schachtner, B., Dexl, J., Mittermeier, A., Stüber, A. T., Topalis, J., Weber, T., Wesp, P., Sabel, B. O., Ricke, J., et al. (2023) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-023-10213-1 · Cited by 549 · see citing works
Sarraju, A., Bruemmer, D., Iterson, E. H. V., Cho, L., Rodríguez, F., & Laffin, L. J. (2023) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2023.1044 · Cited by 455 · see citing works
The Safety of Inpatient Health Care
Bates, D. W., Levine, D. M., Salmasian, H., Syrowatka, A., Shahian, D. M., Lipsitz, S. R., Zebrowski, J. P., Myers, L. C., Logan, M. S., Roy, C. G., et al. (2023) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa2206117 · Cited by 454 · see citing works
Engineering Education in the Era of ChatGPT: Promise and Pitfalls of Generative AI for Education
Qadir, J. (2022) · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.21789434.v1 · Cited by 264 · see citing works
Self-citationChatGPT Makes Medicine Easy to Swallow: An Exploratory Case Study on Simplified Radiology Reports
Jeblick, K., Schachtner, B., Dexl, J., Mittermeier, A., Stüber, A. T., Topalis, J., Weber, T., Wesp, P., Sabel, B., Ricke, J., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.14882 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- R. Hu, K. Y. Fan, P. Pandey, Z. Hu, O. Yau, M. Teng, P. Wang, A. Li, M. Ashraf, and R. Singla, "Insights from teaching artificial intelligence to medical students in canada," Communications Medicine, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 63, 2022.
- S. Zhu, M. Gilbert, I. Chetty, and F. Siddiqui, "The 2021 landscape of fda-approved artificial intelligence/machine learning-enabled medical devices: an analysis of the characteristics and intended use," Interna- tional journal of medical informatics, vol. 165, p. 104828, 2022.
- J. R. Benoit, "Chatgpt for clinical vignette generation, revision, and evaluation," medRxiv, pp. 2023-02, 2023.
- Z. Ji, N. Lee, R. Frieske, T. Yu, D. Su, Y. Xu, E. Ishii, Y. J. Bang, A. Madotto, and P. Fung, "Survey of hallucination in natural language generation," ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 1-38, 2023.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Haltaufderheide, J., & Ranisch, R. (2024) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01157-x · Cited by 396 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ali, H., Qadir, J., Shah, Z., Alam, T., & Househ, M.
- Affiliations
- Hamad bin Khalifa University (QA)
- Corresponding author
- Ali, Hazrat
- Published
- 2023-05-19
- OpenAlex
- W4377087961
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2024: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- dx.doi.org
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, large language models, medical applications, AI adoption in healthcare, clinical decision support
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
