These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
6. ChatGPT's performance in German OB/GYN exams - paving the way for AI-enhanced medical education and clinical practice. Riedel M; Kaefinger K; Stuehrenberg A; Ritter V; Amann N; Graf A; Recker F; Klein E; Kiechle M; Riedel F; Meyer B Front Med (Lausanne); 2023; 10():1296615. PubMed ID: 38155661 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Performance of ChatGPT on the Chinese Postgraduate Examination for Clinical Medicine: Survey Study. Yu P; Fang C; Liu X; Fu W; Ling J; Yan Z; Jiang Y; Cao Z; Wu M; Chen Z; Zhu W; Zhang Y; Abudukeremu A; Wang Y; Liu X; Wang J JMIR Med Educ; 2024 Feb; 10():e48514. PubMed ID: 38335017 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. ChatGPT's Ability to Assess Quality and Readability of Online Medical Information: Evidence From a Cross-Sectional Study. Golan R; Ripps SJ; Reddy R; Loloi J; Bernstein AP; Connelly ZM; Golan NS; Ramasamy R Cureus; 2023 Jul; 15(7):e42214. PubMed ID: 37484787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Human vs. ChatGPT. Is it possible obtain comparable results in the analysis of a scientific systematic review?]. Esposito C; Dell'Omo G; Di Ianni D; Di Procolo P Recenti Prog Med; 2024 Sep; 115(9):420-425. PubMed ID: 39269357 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Transparency in peer review: Exploring the content and tone of reviewers' confidential comments to editors. O'Brien BC; Artino AR; Costello JA; Driessen E; Maggio LA PLoS One; 2021; 16(11):e0260558. PubMed ID: 34843564 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Variability of Reviewers' Comments in the Peer Review Process for Orthopaedic Research. Iantorno SE; Andras LM; Skaggs DL Spine Deform; 2016 Jul; 4(4):268-271. PubMed ID: 27927515 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Use of ChatGPT in medical research and scientific writing. Lee PY; Salim H; Abdullah A; Teo CH Malays Fam Physician; 2023; 18():58. PubMed ID: 37814667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Are Different Versions of ChatGPT's Ability Comparable to the Clinical Diagnosis Presented in Case Reports? A Descriptive Study. Chen J; Liu L; Ruan S; Li M; Yin C J Multidiscip Healthc; 2023; 16():3825-3831. PubMed ID: 38084123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis. Herber OR; Bradbury-Jones C; Böling S; Combes S; Hirt J; Koop Y; Nyhagen R; Veldhuizen JD; Taylor J BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 May; 20(1):122. PubMed ID: 32423388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Exploring the Performance of ChatGPT Versions 3.5, 4, and 4 With Vision in the Chilean Medical Licensing Examination: Observational Study. Rojas M; Rojas M; Burgess V; Toro-Pérez J; Salehi S JMIR Med Educ; 2024 Apr; 10():e55048. PubMed ID: 38686550 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Performance and exploration of ChatGPT in medical examination, records and education in Chinese: Pave the way for medical AI. Wang H; Wu W; Dou Z; He L; Yang L Int J Med Inform; 2023 Sep; 177():105173. PubMed ID: 37549499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Readiness of ChatGPT to Write Scientific Case Reports Independently: A Comparative Evaluation Between Human and Artificial Intelligence. Buholayka M; Zouabi R; Tadinada A Cureus; 2023 May; 15(5):e39386. PubMed ID: 37378091 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Exploring the Boundaries of Reality: Investigating the Phenomenon of Artificial Intelligence Hallucination in Scientific Writing Through ChatGPT References. Athaluri SA; Manthena SV; Kesapragada VSRKM; Yarlagadda V; Dave T; Duddumpudi RTS Cureus; 2023 Apr; 15(4):e37432. PubMed ID: 37182055 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The Potential and Concerns of Using AI in Scientific Research: ChatGPT Performance Evaluation. Khlaif ZN; Mousa A; Hattab MK; Itmazi J; Hassan AA; Sanmugam M; Ayyoub A JMIR Med Educ; 2023 Sep; 9():e47049. PubMed ID: 37707884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing the Accuracy of Generative Conversational Artificial Intelligence in Debunking Sleep Health Myths: Mixed Methods Comparative Study With Expert Analysis. Bragazzi NL; Garbarino S JMIR Form Res; 2024 Apr; 8():e55762. PubMed ID: 38501898 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]