Affiliation:
1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Jichi Medical University Tochigi Japan
2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Koga Red Cross Hospital Koga Japan
3. Medical Examination Center, Ibaraki Western Medical Center Chikusei Japan
Abstract
AbstractAimChatGPT's role in medical writing is a topic of discussion. I experimented whether ChatGPT almost automatically generates Correspondence or Letter addressed to a “translated” article, and thereby wish to arouse discussion regarding ChatGPT use in medical writing.MethodsI input an English article of mine into ChatGPT, tasking it with generating an English Disagreement Letter (Letter 1). Next, I tasked ChatGPT with translating the manuscript addressed to from English‐French‐Spanish‐German. Then, I once again tasked ChatGPT with generating an English Disagreement Letter addressed to a German manuscript (triplicate translated manuscript) (Letter 2).ResultsLetters 1 and 2 are readable and reasonable, shooting the point that the author (myself) felt as the weakness of the article. Letters addressed to French (single translation) and to Spanish (double translation) and longer Letters (corresponding to Letters 1 and 2) are also readable, and thus stand.ConclusionsSolely based on this experiment, one may be able to write a letter even without understanding the meaning of the paper being addressed, let alone the language of the paper. Although this humble experiment does not conclude anything, I plea for a comprehensive discussion on the implications of these findings.
Reference6 articles.
1. A role for artificial intelligence chatbots in the writing of scientific articles
2. Embrace responsible ChatGPT usage to overcome language barriers in academic writing
3. Artificial intelligence in writing manuscripts: some considerations
4. Remaining as a Clinical Doctor in a Smaller Institute after Retirement: A Personal View
5. ZielinskiC WinkerMA AggarwalR et al.WAME board the world Association of Medical Editors. Chatbots generative AI and scholarly manuscripts: WAME recommendations on chatbots and generative artificial intelligence in relation to scholarly publications (Revised May 31 2023). Available at:https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106. Accessed 25 February 2024
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Humans‐written versus ChatGPT‐generated case reports;Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research;2024-09-06
2. ChatGPT use should be prohibited in writing letters;American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology;2024-09
3. Fake case reports: Tasking ChatGPT with dirty work;European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology;2024-09
4. Comparing letters written by humans and ChatGPT: A preliminary study;International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics;2024-07-31
5. Artificial Intelligence Content Detector in Paper Writing: Beyond the Detection;Annals of Surgical Oncology;2024-07-17