Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Introduction: Acute ChatGPT, an artificial inteeligence-powered chatbot, presents a potential influence on healthcare and research in medicine. In this investigation, we systematically reviewed medical literature regarding the utilization of ChatGPT, utilizing the Scopus database. Methods: This systematic review follows the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, and according to the search in Scopus, 11,219 articles were identified. Original studies, clinical trials, correspondence articles, letters, notes, and research protocols were included, resulting in 14 studies. Results: All studies were published in 2023, among them 35.7% (5/14) were editorials and 14.3% (2/14) were opinion or perspective articles. Only one study (19) conducted a pilot study on the application of ChatGPT in medical diagnosis. Furthermore, 64.3% of the studies were published in quartile 1 journals according to Scimago rankings, and the USA had the highest production of articles on ChatGPT in medicine (35.7%). The included studies highlighted the potential and challenges of ChatGPT in various domains of healthcare. Ethical concerns, such as data privacy and bias, were also analyzed. Various fields of health were evaluated with ChatGPT, including nuclear medicine, gynecology, nuclear medicine, and emergency medicine. ChatGPT was considered a tool to improve patient education. ChatGPT has a promising role in scientific writing, emphasizing the need for human involvement, ethical guidelines, and addressing concerns related to bias, fabrication, and plagiarism. Conclusions: Scopus-retrieved articles underscored the potential advantages and ethical dilemmas associated with the integration of ChatGPT in healthcare. While ChatGPT demonstrated promising applications in various medical domains, caution, further evaluation, and ethical considerations are needed for responsible implementation in real-world clinical settings.
Moya‐Salazar et al. (Thu,) studied this question.