Search Results (1 to 10 of 12 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 9 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 3 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Research Protocols
- 0 JMIR Human Factors
- 0 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 0 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 0 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 JMIR Mental Health
- 0 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Medical Education
- 0 JMIR Cancer
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 JMIR Cardio
- 0 JMIR Formative Research
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Dermatology
- 0 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 0 JMIR Aging
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIR Nursing
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 JMIR Infodemiology
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR AI
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Ethical Considerations of Using ChatGPT in Health Care
J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e48009
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Utility of ChatGPT in Clinical Practice
CDS optimization: Liu et al [8] studied 5 clinicians’ ratings of 36 CDS recommendations generated by Chat GPT and 29 recommendations generated by experts. The research results revealed that 9 of the top 20 recommendations in the survey were generated by Chat GPT. The study found that recommendations generated by Chat GPT provided a unique perspective and were rated as highly understandable and relevant, moderately useful but with low acceptability, bias, inversion, and redundancy.
J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e48568
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Disagreements were discussed and consulted with a third reviewer (J Liu) to reach consensus.
We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (Ro B 2) to assess the risk of bias for each study [30]. This tool assesses 5 domains to address different types of bias: randomization process, deviations from the intended interventions, missing outcome data, measurement of the outcome, and selection of the reported result. Each component includes a low risk of bias, some concerns, or high risk of bias.
J Med Internet Res 2022;24(9):e38697
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section