The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
REVIEW article
Front. Artif. Intell.
Sec. Medicine and Public Health
Volume 8 - 2025 |
doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1518049
Benefits, Limits, and Risks of ChatGPT in Medicine
Provisionally accepted- 1 Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University, New York, New York, United States
- 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
- 3 Harrington Heart and Vascular Institute, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
- 4 Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States
- 5 Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Michigan, United States
- 6 Essen University Hospital, Essen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
- 7 Bakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, Medical Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States
- 8 Department of Pathology, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York, New York, United States
- 9 Hasso Plattner Institute for Digital Health at Mount Sinai, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, United States
- 10 Department of Cardiology I, University Hospital Münster, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
- 11 Langone Medical Center, New York University, New York City, New York, United States
ChatGPT represents a transformative technology in healthcare, with demonstrated impacts across clinical practice, medical education, and research. Studies show significant efficiency gains, including 70% reduction in administrative time for discharge summaries and achievement of medical professional-level performance on standardized tests (60% accuracy on USMLE, 78.2% on PubMedQA). ChatGPT offers personalized learning platforms, automated scoring, and instant access to vast medical knowledge in medical education, addressing resource limitations and enhancing training efficiency. It streamlines clinical workflows by supporting triage processes, generating discharge summaries, and alleviating administrative burdens, allowing healthcare professionals to focus more on patient care. Additionally, ChatGPT facilitates remote monitoring and chronic disease management, providing personalized advice, medication reminders, and emotional support, thus bridging gaps between clinical visits. Its ability to process and synthesize vast amounts of data accelerates research workflows, aiding in literature reviews, hypothesis generation, and clinical trial designs. This paper aims to gather and analyze published studies involving ChatGPT, focusing on exploring its advantages and disadvantages within the healthcare context. To aid in understanding and progress, our analysis is organized into six key areas: 1) Information and Education, 2) Triage and Symptom Assessment, 3) Remote Monitoring and Support, 4) Mental Healthcare Assistance, 5) Research and Decision Support, and 6) Language Translation. Realizing ChatGPT’s full potential in healthcare requires addressing key limitations, such as its lack of clinical experience, inability to process visual data, and absence of emotional intelligence. Ethical, privacy, and regulatory challenges further complicate its integration. Future improvements should focus on enhancing accuracy, developing multimodal AI models, improving empathy through sentiment analysis, and safeguarding against artificial hallucination. While not a replacement for healthcare professionals, ChatGPT can serve as a powerful assistant, augmenting their expertise to improve efficiency, accessibility, and quality of care. This collaboration ensures responsible adoption of AI in transforming healthcare delivery. While ChatGPT demonstrates significant potential in healthcare transformation, systematic evaluation of its implementation across different healthcare settings reveals varying levels of evidence quality - from robust randomized trials in medical education to preliminary observational studies in clinical practice. This heterogeneity in evidence quality necessitates a structured approach to future research and implementation.
Keywords: Large Language Model, artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, Healthcare questions, such as identifying specific anatomical structures. This limitation arises from ChatGPT's inability to process visual information [30]
Received: 27 Oct 2024; Accepted: 15 Jan 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Tangsrivimol, Darzidehkalani, Virk, Wang, Egger, Wang, Hacking, Glicksberg, Strauss and Krittanawong. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Markus Strauss, Department of Cardiology I, University Hospital Münster, Münster, 48149, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.