PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 30, 2026Neurotrauma Reports0 citationsOpen Access

Can Large Language Models Answer Questions about Spinal Cord Injury? Risks, Challenges, and Opportunities—A Narrative Review

View Full Paper
RDRahul K. DesaiSSSimran SagguMPMasha Panahi

Key Points

  • The aim is to explore the use of AI chatbots for providing health information related to spinal cord injury.
  • Conducted a narrative synthesis of the literature on AI chatbots and spinal cord injury (SCI).
  • Reviewed nine primary articles retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar.
  • Analyzed opportunities, challenges, and risks associated with chatbots in SCI-related health information.
  • Identified both opportunities and significant challenges in using AI chatbots for SCI health information.
  • Found mixed evidence regarding the effectiveness of AI chatbots in answering SCI-specific questions.
  • Highlighted risks of misinformation that could affect individuals and caregivers in health outcomes.

Abstract

Access to high-quality health information (HI) is critical for everyone involved in the research and management of medical conditions such as spinal cord injury (SCI). Recently, the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) through AI-based chatbots like ChatGPT has become increasingly integral to how people seek and consume HI. While LLMs have been evaluated in various clinical and health domains, there remains a notable gap in the literature regarding their use for SCI-specific questions. We conducted a narrative synthesis to identify the opportunities, challenges, and risks of using LLMs in SCI-related HI tasks, and to provide future direction for researchers, clinicians, and policymakers to better understand this fast-evolving landscape. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar up to December 2025 and identified nine primary articles that investigated LLMs in the context of SCI-related queries. Our synthesis of the literature revealed that although there are promising results, these should be taken with caution due to mixed evidence for LLM’s capability to effectively answer SCI-related questions. In addition, the LLM outputs were challenging to read, typically requiring an education level equivalent to a college-level student (grades 14–15) to be adequately understood. We recognize that LLMs can serve as valuable tools for accessing HI in SCI. However, LLMs can also pose significant risks, including the spread of mis- or dis-information that may be inaccurate or even dangerous, which can mislead individuals and caregivers, potentially resulting in detrimental health outcomes. Finally, methodological rigour needs to be improved to produce higher levels of evidence.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Desai et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69f2a4b78c0f03fd67763dd0https://doi.org/10.1177/2689288x261425900
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper