The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: writing better scientific review articles

被引:3
|
作者
Huang, Jingshan [1 ,2 ]
Tan, Ming [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ S Alabama, Sch Comp, Mobile, AL USA
[2] Univ S Alabama, Coll Med, Mobile, AL USA
[3] China Med Univ, Inst Biochem & Mol Biol, Inst Biomed Sci, Taichung, Taiwan
[4] China Med Univ, Res Ctr Canc Biol, Taichung, Taiwan
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH | 2023年 / 13卷 / 04期
关键词
Artificial intelligence; ChatGPT; scientific writing; review article;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Artificial intelligence tools represent an exciting opportunity for scientists to streamline their research and write impactful articles. Using artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT can greatly improve writing review articles for scientists, by enhancing efficiency and quality. ChatGPT speeds up writing, develops outlines, adds details, and helps improve writing style. However, ChatGPT's limitations must be kept in mind, and generated text must be reviewed and edited to avoid plagiarism and fabrication. Despite these limitations, ChatGPT is a powerful tool that allows scientists to focus on analyzing and interpreting literature reviews. Embracing these tools can help scientists produce meaningful research in a more efficient and effective manner, however caution must be taken and unchecked use of ChatGPT in writing should be avoided.
引用
收藏
页码:1148 / 1154
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] An Investigation into ChatGPT's Application for a Scientific Writing Assignment
    Rojas, Anthony J.
    JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION, 2024, 101 (05) : 1959 - 1965
  • [42] ChatGPT for scientific paper writing-promises and perils
    He, Shijun
    Yang, Fan
    Zuo, Jian-ping
    Lin, Ze-min
    INNOVATION, 2023, 4 (06):
  • [43] EDITORIAL Writing and scientific literature Summary - trailer of scientific communication
    Caramelli, Bruno
    REVISTA DA ASSOCIACAO MEDICA BRASILEIRA, 2011, 57 (06): : 607 - 607
  • [44] SCIENTIFIC WRITING AND THE GENERAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION
    Hebb, D. O.
    Bindra, Dalbir
    AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 1952, 7 (10) : 569 - 573
  • [45] Scientific communication and the social practice of writing
    Zawoznik, Myriam
    REVISTA ARGENTINA DE MICROBIOLOGIA, 2018, 50 (01): : 1 - 2
  • [46] PEER-REVIEW OF SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES
    BUCKWALTER, JA
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC RESEARCH, 1995, 13 (01) : 1 - 1
  • [47] Creating Logical Flow When Writing Scientific Articles
    Barroga, Edward
    Matanguihan, Glafera Janet
    JOURNAL OF KOREAN MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2021, 36 (40)
  • [48] ASSESSING THE SCIENTIFIC QUALITY OF REVIEW ARTICLES
    MILNE, R
    CHAMBERS, L
    JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 1993, 47 (03) : 169 - 170
  • [49] EXAMINING THE ROLE OF CHATGPT IN THE EVALUATION OF SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACTS
    Cavanagh, J.
    Lorenz, W.
    Holland, A.
    Mead, B.
    Scarola, G.
    Smart, N.
    Fischer, J.
    Janis, J.
    Heniford, B. T.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2024, 111
  • [50] Elevating scientific writing with ChatGPT: A guide for reviewers, editors ... and authors ...
    Rozencwajg, S.
    Kantor, E.
    ANAESTHESIA CRITICAL CARE & PAIN MEDICINE, 2023, 42 (03)