Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Introduction: Chat GPT could be a supportive tool in scientific research and writing, allowing researchers to focus on generating results and data analysis. However, it is important to consider possible biases and limitations in text generation, as well as ethical and quality implications in scientific knowledge production. Methods: a literature search was conducted on PubMed and Scopus with the keyword "ChatGPT," establishing inclusion and exclusion criteria to select 10 relevant articles on the use of ChatGPT in scientific research and writing in the last 5 years and open access. Results: various authors point out the potential of ChatGPT as a supportive tool in scientific research and writing, highlighting its ability to provide useful comments and suggestions, as well as its use in the development of coherent text and the management of references and citations. However, possible ethical biases and limitations in its use and the need for human supervision are also cautioned. The journal Nature establishes ethical and transparency principles for its use and recommends excluding ChatGPT as an accredited author in a research work. Conclusions: ChatGPT is a useful tool in scientific writing, but its use must be regulated to avoid the substitution of human experience and ensure ethical and quality standards, and caution and human supervision must be exercised to ensure the accuracy of results and recognize its use in research works without attributing authorship.
William Castillo‐González (Mon,) studied this question.