This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Artificial Intelligence (1408) Generative Language Models Including ChatGPT (320) Epublishing and Open Access (86) Reviews in Medical Education (60) New Methods and Approaches in Medical Education (242) Methods and Instruments in Medical Informatics (132) Chatbots and Conversational Agents (542)

Published on in Vol 26 (2024)

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/53164, first published .
Hallucination Rates and Reference Accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for Systematic Reviews: Comparative Analysis

Hallucination Rates and Reference Accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for Systematic Reviews: Comparative Analysis

Hallucination Rates and Reference Accuracy of ChatGPT and Bard for Systematic Reviews: Comparative Analysis

Authors of this article:

Mikaël Chelli1 Author Orcid Image ;   Jules Descamps2 Author Orcid Image ;   Vincent Lavoué1 Author Orcid Image ;   Christophe Trojani1 Author Orcid Image ;   Michel Azar1 Author Orcid Image ;   Marcel Deckert3 Author Orcid Image ;   Jean-Luc Raynier1 Author Orcid Image ;   Gilles Clowez1 Author Orcid Image ;   Pascal Boileau1 Author Orcid Image ;   Caroline Ruetsch-Chelli3 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (12) Tweetations (10) Metrics

Journals

  1. Ren X, Wei Q. Sligpt: A Large Language Model-Based Approach for Data Dependency Analysis on Solidity Smart Contracts. Software 2024;3(3):345 View
  2. Adam G, DeYoung J, Paul A, Saldanha I, Balk E, Trikalinos T, Wallace B. Literature search sandbox: a large language model that generates search queries for systematic reviews. JAMIA Open 2024;7(3) View
  3. Zhang D, Ma Z, Gong R, Lian L, Li Y, He Z, Han Y, Hui J, Huang J, Jiang J, Weng W, Feng J. Using Natural Language Processing (GPT-4) for Computed Tomography Image Analysis of Cerebral Hemorrhages in Radiology: Retrospective Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2024;26:e58741 View
  4. Mija D, Kehlet H, Rosero E, Joshi G. Evaluating the role of ChatGPT in perioperative pain management versus procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) recommendations. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2024;133(6):1318 View
  5. Sanduleanu S, Ersahin K, Bremm J, Talibova N, Damer T, Erdogan M, Kottlors J, Goertz L, Bruns C, Maintz D, Abdullayev N. Feasibility of GPT-3.5 versus Machine Learning for Automated Surgical Decision-Making Determination: A Multicenter Study on Suspected Appendicitis. AI 2024;5(4):1942 View
  6. Thimm H, Rasmussen K. ChatGPT discovery of green image damaging information for large production companies. Journal of Cleaner Production 2024;478:143978 View
  7. Yan L, Greiff S, Teuber Z, Gašević D. Promises and challenges of generative artificial intelligence for human learning. Nature Human Behaviour 2024;8(10):1839 View
  8. Ivanisenko T, Demenkov P, Ivanisenko V. An Accurate and Efficient Approach to Knowledge Extraction from Scientific Publications Using Structured Ontology Models, Graph Neural Networks, and Large Language Models. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024;25(21):11811 View
  9. Iglesias S, Earp B, Voinea C, Mann S, Zahiu A, Jecker N, Savulescu J. Digital Doppelgängers and Lifespan Extension: What Matters?. The American Journal of Bioethics 2024:1 View
  10. Tomczyk P, Brüggemann P, Mergner N, Petrescu M. Are AI tools better than traditional tools in literature searching? Evidence from E-commerce research. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2024 View
  11. Goto H, Shiraishi Y, Okada S. Performance Evaluation of GPT-4o and o1-Preview Using the Certification Examination for the Japanese 'Operations Chief of Radiography With X-rays'. Cureus 2024 View
  12. Gunesli I, Aksun S, Fathelbab J, Yildiz B. Comparative evaluation of ChatGPT-4, ChatGPT-3.5 and Google Gemini on PCOS assessment and management based on recommendations from the 2023 guideline. Endocrine 2024 View