Cited by 30Cardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated Phenomena

Acute Pulmonary Edema After Hyperbaric Oxygen Treatment: A Case Report Written With ChatGPT Assistance

Open access
Akhter, Haris M, Cooper, Jeffrey S·2023·Cureus

Abstract

Acute pulmonary edema is a rare but severe complication of hyperbaric oxygen therapy. While patients with known cardiovascular problems may be able to withstand this therapy, rapid decompensation can still occur. Here, we present a case of a patient with known low ejection fraction and severe mitral regurgitation who developed acute pulmonary edema during the first hyperbaric treatment for a foot ulcer. This case highlights the importance of identifying patients that are high risk, such as those with moderate-to-severe cardiac disease, and pursuing other treatment options to avoid this complication.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7759/cureus.34752

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 recently published case studies with ChatGPT use in a journal contest discouraged the use of ChatGPT, citing lack of scientific accuracy, limited updated knowledge, and lack of ability to critically discuss results.

    “These case studies discouraged the use of ChatGPT, citing the lack of scientific accuracy, the limited updated knowledge, and the lack of ability to critically discuss the results [38,49,50].”

    From ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns (2023) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Discussion reports a 2021 knowledge cutoff, nonexistent citations, and limited ability to critically discuss results and literature. But the authors do not discourage ChatGPT use outright: they call it valuable for augmenting manuscript writing, while stressing that it cannot replace independent literature review and appraisal. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [1]Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Indications, 14th Edition Moon RE North Palm Beach Best Publishing Company 2019

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Akhter, H. M., & Cooper, J. S.
Affiliations
Nebraska Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Akhter, Haris M
Venue
Cureus
Published
2023-02-07
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
e34752-e34752
ISSN
2168-8184 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4319334927
Cited by
29
References
11
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 17
FWCI
5.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Cureus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated Phenomena
Keywords
acute pulmonary edema, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, reduced ejection fraction, mitral regurgitation, acute decompensated heart failure, foot ulcer, high-risk patient identification, alternative treatment options

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