PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Hosseini, Mohammad
AU  - Gao, Catherine A.
AU  - Liebovitz, David
AU  - Carvalho, Alexandre
AU  - Ahmad, Faraz S.
AU  - Luo, Yuan
AU  - MacDonald, Ngan
AU  - Holmes, Kristi
AU  - Kho, Abel
TI  - An exploratory survey about using ChatGPT in education, healthcare, and research
AID  - 10.1101/2023.03.31.23287979
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.03.31.23287979
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/04/03/2023.03.31.23287979.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/04/03/2023.03.31.23287979.full
AB  - Objective ChatGPT is the first large language model (LLM) to reach a large, mainstream audience. Its rapid adoption and exploration by the population at large has sparked a wide range of discussions regarding its acceptable and optimal integration in different areas. In a hybrid (virtual and in-person) panel discussion event, we examined various perspectives regarding the use of ChatGPT in education, research, and healthcare.Materials and Methods We surveyed in-person and online attendees using an audience interaction platform (Slido). We quantitatively analyzed received responses on questions about the use of ChatGPT in various contexts. We compared pairwise categorical groups with Fisher’s Exact. Furthermore, we used qualitative methods to analyze and code discussions.Results We received 420 responses from an estimated 844 participants (response rate 49.7%). Only 40% of the audience had tried ChatGPT. More trainees had tried ChatGPT compared with faculty. Those who had used ChatGPT were more interested in using it in a wider range of contexts going forwards. Of the three discussed contexts, the greatest uncertainty was shown about using ChatGPT in education. Pros and cons were raised during discussion for the use of this technology in education, research, and healthcare.Discussion There was a range of perspectives around the uses of ChatGPT in education, research, and healthcare, with still much uncertainty around its acceptability and optimal uses. There were different perspectives from respondents of different roles (trainee vs faculty vs staff). More discussion is needed to explore perceptions around the use of LLMs such as ChatGPT in vital sectors such as education, healthcare and research. Given involved risks and unforeseen challenges, taking a thoughtful and measured approach in adoption would reduce the likelihood of harm.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported in part by the Northwestern University Institute for Augmented Intelligence in Medicine. CAG is supported by NIH/NHLBI F32HL162377. KH is supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS, UL1TR001422), National Institutes of Health (NIH). FSA is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K23HL155970) and the American Heart Association (AHA number 856917). The funders have not played a role in the design, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Northwestern University IRB granted exemption (STU00218786).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData availability: Data are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author. Code availability: Code used in this analysis and visualization are available at https://github.com/cloverbunny/gptsurvey/blob/main/gptsurvey.ipynb. https://zenodo.org/record/7789186#.ZCb0eezML0o