MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415285815 · doi:10.1177/20552076251390280

Can large language models serve as digital assistants for medical undergraduates? – A bibliometric mapping and scoping analysis of the medical-education literature

2025· review· en· W4415285815 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hong Wang, Wenhui Shan, R.Z. Liu, Zhening Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory analysisExploratory researchEmpirical researchMEDLINEPresentation (obstetrics)Sustainable developmentEmpirical evidence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Since the public release of ChatGPT in late 2022, large language models (LLMs) have been rapidly adopted in medical education, and the emergence of the free and open-source Chinese model DeepSeek in 2025 has further accelerated local uptake. However, their academic impact and measurable outcomes remain unclear. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of literature from 1999 to 2025, mapping the evolution, thematic landscape and emerging frontiers of LLM-assisted medical education, with particular attention to the post-ChatGPT phenomenon represented by DeepSeek, in order to clarify current research status and inform future directions for educators and policymakers. Methods: English-language articles and reviews (1999-23/03/2025) were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Publication trends, co-authorships, co-citations, burst keywords and thematic clusters were analysed with CiteSpace 6.4.R1, R-bibliometrix and VOSviewer 1.6.20. Results: The analysis revealed a sharp growth in publications after 2022, coinciding with the release of ChatGPT, with the United States, China and Canada emerging as leading contributors. Influential institutions included Mayo Clinic, University of Toronto and Karolinska Institutet. Research hotspots clustered around generative artificial intelligence (AI) applications, machine learning, simulation-based training and blended learning. Recent bursts of keywords such as 'DeepSeek' indicate expanding regional engagement and diversification of AI tools. Conclusions: Large language model research in medical education is transitioning from exploratory commentaries to more applied and empirical investigations. While open-source models offer opportunities for broader access, critical challenges remain regarding measurable educational outcomes, ethical frameworks and global equity. Addressing these gaps through rigorous outcome-based studies and cross-institutional collaboration will be essential for the sustainable integration of LLMs into medical curricula.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.036
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.366 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital HealthSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207