Generative Pre-Trained Transformer-Empowered Healthcare Conversations: Current Trends, Challenges, and Future Directions in Large Language Model-Enabled Medical Chatbots
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review explores the transformative integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and healthcare through conversational AI leveraging Natural Language Processing (NLP). Focusing on Large Language Models (LLMs), this paper navigates through various sections, commencing with an overview of AI’s significance in healthcare and the role of conversational AI. It delves into fundamental NLP techniques, emphasizing their facilitation of seamless healthcare conversations. Examining the evolution of LLMs within NLP frameworks, the paper discusses key models used in healthcare, exploring their advantages and implementation challenges. Practical applications in healthcare conversations, from patient-centric utilities like diagnosis and treatment suggestions to healthcare provider support systems, are detailed. Ethical and legal considerations, including patient privacy, ethical implications, and regulatory compliance, are addressed. The review concludes by spotlighting current challenges, envisaging future trends, and highlighting the transformative potential of LLMs and NLP in reshaping healthcare interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it