Table 1.
Key study caractreristics.
| Author | Year, month | Study design | Key findings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poduval et al. | 2020, January | Narrative review | Discussion of key concepts in the field of artificial intelligence and directions for its application in orthopaedics. |
| Cheng et al. | 2023, April | Letter to editor | Identification of the major roles of GPT-4 including scientific research, disease diagnosis, treatment options, preoperative planning, intraoperative support, and postoperative rehabilitation for arthroplasty doctors. |
| Hernigou et al. | 2023, August | Editorial | Exploration of the potential of AI in orthopedic surgery, encompassing its ability to analyze vast datasets and generate valuable insights. This includes its role in diagnosis, preoperative planning, clinical decision support through predictive analysis, and personalized treatment planning. |
| Karnuta et al. | 2023, June | Original article | Hypothesis of a genuine revolution in orthopedic practice, particularly in areas like personalized patient care, image analysis, and surgical decision-making. Suggestion of providing a specialized training and exposure AI systems to orthopedic texts and manuscripts to enhance their performance. |
| Dubin et al. | 2023, April | Original article | Comparison between the appropriateness and reliability of ChatGPT and Google web search as resources for patients seeking health information online. |
| Cuthbert et al. | 2023, September | Original article | Evaluation of ChatGPT in passing Section 1 of the Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS) examination in Traumatology and Orthopedic Surgery. |
| Alessandri-Bonetti et al. | 2023, July | Letter to editor | Assessment of ChatGPT's medical knowledge in comparison to graduate medical doctors in Italy through its performance in the Italian Residency Admission National Exam. |
| Bi et al. | 2023, April | Original article | Discussion of the accuracy of the generated content and the necessity for quality control and fact-checking. |
| Olliver et al. | 2023, March | Editorial | Discussion about the issues of plagiarism and false content in scientific literature. |
| Kunze et al. | 2023, June | Editorial | Critical evaluation of transparency, responsibility, and thorough evaluation of AI systems, aiming to improve their reliability and the quality of the generated results. |
| Parsa et al. | 2023, April | Editorial | Discussion of data privacy concerns, quality control, biases in training data, and the challenge of attributing authorship in AI-generated content. |