Background: ChatGPT may act as a research assistant to help organize the direction of thinking and summarize research findings. However, few studies have examined the quality, similarity (abstracts being similar to the original one), and accuracy of the abstracts generated by ChatGPT when researchers provide full-text basic research papers. Objective: We aimed to assess the applicability of an artificial intelligence (AI) model in generating abstracts for basic preclinical research. Methods: We selected 30 basic research papers from Nature, Genome Biology, and Biological Psychiatry. Excluding abstracts, we inputted the full text into ChatPDF, an application of a language model based on ChatGPT, and we prompted it to generate abstracts with the same style as used in the original papers. A total of 8 experts were invited to evaluate the quality of these abstracts (based on a Likert scale of 0-10) and identify which abstracts were generated by ChatPDF, using a blind approach. These abstracts were also evaluated for their similarity to the original abstracts and the accuracy of the AI content. Results: The quality of ChatGPT-generated abstracts was lower than that of the actual abstracts (10-point Likert scale: mean 4.72, SD 2.09 vs mean 8.09, SD 1.03; P<.001). The difference in quality was significant in the unstructured format (mean difference –4.33; 95% CI –4.79 to –3.86; P<.001) but minimal in the 4-subheading structured format (mean difference –2.33; 95% CI –2.79 to –1.86). Among the 30 ChatGPT-generated abstracts, 3 showed wrong conclusions, and 10 were identified as AI content. The mean percentage of similarity between the original and the generated abstracts was not high (2.10%-4.40%). The blinded reviewers achieved a 93% (224/240) accuracy rate in guessing which abstracts were written using ChatGPT. Conclusions: Using ChatGPT to generate a scientific abstract may not lead to issues of similarity when using real full texts written by humans. However, the quality of the ChatGPT-generated abstracts was suboptimal, and their accuracy was not 100%.

Objective To systematically examine the effectiveness and tolerability of psilocybin for treating end-of-life anxiety symptoms.Methods The Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO databases were searched up to November 25, 2020. We enrolled clinical trials investigating psilocybin for treating end-of-life anxiety symptoms. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects model.Results Overall, five studies were included, revealing that psilocybin was superior to the placebo in treating state anxiety at 1 day (Hedges’ g, -0.70; 95% confidence interval, -1.01 to -0.39) and 2 weeks (-1.03; -1.47 to -0.60) after treatment. Psilocybin was more effective than placebo in treating trait anxiety at 1 day (-0.71; -1.15 to -0.26), 2 weeks (-1.08; -1.80 to -0.36), and 6 months (-0.84; -1.37 to -0.30) after treatment. Psilocybin was associated with transient elevation in systolic (19.00; 13.58–24.41 mm Hg) and diastolic (8.66; 5.18–12.15 mm Hg) blood pressure compared with placebo. The differences between psilocybin and placebo groups with regard to allcause discontinuation, serious adverse events, and heart rates were nonsignificant.Conclusion Psilocybin-assisted therapy could ameliorate end-of-life anxiety symptoms without serious adverse events. Because of the small sample sizes of the included studies and high heterogeneity on long-term outcomes, future randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes are needed.

Curcumin is a polyphenol with strong antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects that has been shown to be effective in ameliorating cognitive decline in animal studies. However, its clinical effectiveness is inconclusive, and relevant gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) have been reported. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the existing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of effects of curcumin on overall cognitive function, individual cognitive domains, and gastrointestinal AE. The study includes 8 RCTs and 389 participants. A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Compared with the placebo group, the curcumin group was associated with an improvement in working memory (Hedges’ g = 0.396, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.078 to 0.714, p = 0.015) and a borderline benefit in processing speed (Hedges’ g = 0.303, 95% CI = −0.013 to 0.619, p = 0.06). In the domains of language, episodic memory/visual learning, verbal memory, cognitive flexibility/problem solving, and overall cognitive function, no significant difference existed for the comparison between the curcumin and placebo groups. The curcumin group had a significantly higher risk of gastrointestinal AEs than the placebo group (odds ratio = 3.019, 95% CI = 1.118 to 8.150, p = 0.029). In the future, the effects of curcumin on working memory, processing speed, and gastrointestinal AE should be further investigated.

Background: Studies have demonstrated that exercise can mitigate the intensity of menstrual pain in primary dysmenorrhea, but the most effective type of exercise remains unclear. The objective of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of different exercise regimens in reducing pain associated with primary dysmenorrhoea. Methods: Randomized controlled trials investigating the relationship between menstrual pain and exercise were selected from major electronic databases until February 2, 2024. The primary outcome was the effect of exercise on pain intensity measured by the mean difference on a 10-cm visual analogue scale at 4 and 8 weeks after intervention. The secondary outcome was the difference in risk of dropout at 8 weeks. The study protocol was registered as INPLASY202330050. Results: This systematic review and network meta-analysis included 29 randomized controlled trials, which involved 1808 participants with primary dysmenorrhea. Exercise interventions included relaxation exercise, strength training, aerobic activity, yoga, mixed exercise, and the Kegel maneuver. Relaxation exercise was the most effective in reducing menstrual pain in 4 weeks (− 3.56; 95% confidence interval: − 5.03 to − 2.08). All exercise interventions were effective in reducing menstrual pain at 8 weeks, with reductions ranging from − 3.87 (95% CI − 5.51 to − 2.22) for relaxation exercise to − 2.75 (95% CI − 4.00 to − 1.51) for yoga, compared to the control group. Relaxation exercises were found to have a significantly lower dropout risk (− 0.11; 95% CI − 0.20 to 0.02), while none of the exercise types was associated with a higher dropout risk than the control group. Conclusion: All exercise interventions were effective in reducing menstrual pain in primary dysmenorrhea after 8 weeks of intervention. However, relaxation exercise was found to be the most effective intervention at 4 and 8 weeks and had the lowest risk of dropout. Graphical