Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Formative Research

Date Submitted: Jan 28, 2024
Open Peer Review Period: Jan 30, 2024 - Mar 26, 2024
Date Accepted: Jul 14, 2024
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

ChatGPT Use Among Pediatric Health Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

Kisvarday S, Yan A, Yarahuan J, Kats D, Ray M, Kim E, Hong P, Spector J, Bickel J, Parsons C, Rabbani N, Hron J

ChatGPT Use Among Pediatric Health Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e56797

DOI: 10.2196/56797

PMID: 39265163

PMCID: 11427860

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

ChatGPT Use Among Pediatric Healthcare Providers: survey study

  • Susannah Kisvarday; 
  • Adam Yan; 
  • Julia Yarahuan; 
  • Daniel Kats; 
  • Mondira Ray; 
  • Eugene Kim; 
  • Peter Hong; 
  • Jacob Spector; 
  • Jonathan Bickel; 
  • Chase Parsons; 
  • Naveed Rabbani; 
  • Jonathan Hron

ABSTRACT

Background:

The public launch of OpenAI’s ChatGPT generated immediate interest in the use of large language models (LLMs). Healthcare institutions are now grappling with establishing policies and guidelines for use of these technologies, yet little is known about how healthcare providers view LLMs in medical settings. Moreover, there are no studies of how pediatric providers are adopting these readily accessible tools.

Objective:

This study aims to determine how pediatric providers are currently using LLMs in their work as well as their interest in using a HIPAA-compliant version of ChatGPT in the future.

Methods:

A survey instrument consisting of structured and unstructured questions was iteratively developed and then sent via REDCap to all Boston Children’s Hospital prescribers. Participation was voluntary and uncompensated; all survey responses were anonymous.

Results:

Surveys were completed by 390 pediatric providers. Approximately 50% of respondents had used an LLM; of these, 75% were already using an LLM for non-clinical work and 27% for clinical work. Providers detailed various ways they are currently using an LLM in their clinical and non-clinical work. Only 29% indicated that ChatGPT should be used for patient care in its present state; however, 73% reported they would use a HIPAA-compliant version of ChatGPT if one were available. Providers’ proposed future uses of LLMs in healthcare are also described.

Conclusions:

Despite significant concerns and barriers to LLM use in healthcare, pediatric providers are already using LLMs at work. This study will give healthcare leaders and policymakers needed information about how providers are using LLMs in a clinical context.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Kisvarday S, Yan A, Yarahuan J, Kats D, Ray M, Kim E, Hong P, Spector J, Bickel J, Parsons C, Rabbani N, Hron J

ChatGPT Use Among Pediatric Health Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

JMIR Form Res 2024;8:e56797

DOI: 10.2196/56797

PMID: 39265163

PMCID: 11427860

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.