# The impact and applications of ChatGPT: a systematic review of literature reviews

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18086 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18086/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 3 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 May 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Is ChatGPT a Good Sentiment Analyzer? A Preliminary Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.04339/) (2023)
- [ChatGPT: A Meta-Analysis after 2.5 Months](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13795/) (2023)
- [Chatbots and ChatGPT: A Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Review of Publications in Web of Science and Scopus Databases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05436/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Potential of ChatGPT in predicting stock market trends based on Twitter Sentiment Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.06273/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The conversational artificial-intelligence (AI) technology ChatGPT has become one of the most widely used natural language processing tools. With thousands of published papers demonstrating its applications across various industries and fields, ChatGPT has sparked significant interest in the research community. Reviews of primary data have also begun to emerge. An overview of the available evidence from multiple reviews and studies could provide further insights, minimize redundancy, and identify areas where further research is needed. Objective: To evaluate the existing reviews and literature related to ChatGPT's applications and its potential impact on different fields by conducting a systematic review of reviews and bibliometric analysis of primary literature. Methods: PubMed, EuropePMC, Dimensions AI, medRxiv, bioRxiv, arXiv, and Google Scholar were searched for ChatGPT-related publications from 2022 to 4/30/2023. Studies including secondary data related to the application of ChatGPT were considered. Reporting and risk of bias assesment was performed using PRISMA guidelines. Results: A total of 305 unique records with potential relevance to the review were identified from a pool of over 2,000 original articles. After multi-step screening process, 11 reviews were selected, consisting of 9 reviews specifically focused on ChatGPT and 2 reviews on broader AI topics that also included discussions on ChatGPT. We also conducted bibliometric analysis of primary data. Conclusions: While AI has the potential to revolutionize various industries, further interdisciplinary research, customized integrations, and ethical innovation are necessary to address existing concerns and ensure its responsible use. Protocol Registration: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023417336, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/87U6Q.