Dataset Information

Performance of ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, and Bing on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination: a cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

We aimed to describe the performance and evaluate the educational value of justifications provided by artificial intelligence chatbots, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Bard, Claude, and Bing, on the Peruvian National Medical Licensing Examination (P-NLME).

Methods

This was a cross-sectional analytical study. On July 25, 2023, each multiple-choice question (MCQ) from the P-NLME was entered into each chatbot (GPT-3, GPT-4, Bing, Bard, and Claude) 3 times. Then, 4 medical educators categorized the MCQs in terms of medical area, item type, and whether the MCQ required Peru-specific knowledge. They assessed the educational value of the justifications from the 2 top performers (GPT-4 and Bing).

Results

GPT-4 scored 86.7% and Bing scored 82.2%, followed by Bard and Claude, and the historical performance of Peruvian examinees was 55%. Among the factors associated with correct answers, only MCQs that required Peru-specific knowledge had lower odds (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.61), whereas the remaining factors showed no associations. In assessing the educational value of justifications provided by GPT-4 and Bing, neither showed any significant differences in certainty, usefulness, or potential use in the classroom.

Conclusion

Among chatbots, GPT-4 and Bing were the top performers, with Bing performing better at Peru-specific MCQs. Moreover, the educational value of justifications provided by the GPT-4 and Bing could be deemed appropriate. However, it is essential to start addressing the educational value of these chatbots, rather than merely their performance on examinations.

SUBMITTER: Torres-Zegarra BC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11009012 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Performance of ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, and Bing on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination: a cross-sectional study.

Torres-Zegarra Betzy Clariza BC Rios-Garcia Wagner W Ñaña-Cordova Alvaro Micael AM Arteaga-Cisneros Karen Fatima KF Chalco Xiomara Cristina Benavente XCB Ordoñez Marina Atena Bustamante MAB Rios Carlos Jesus Gutierrez CJG Godoy Carlos Alberto Ramos CAR Quezada Kristell Luisa Teresa Panta KLTP Gutierrez-Arratia Jesus Daniel JD Flores-Cohaila Javier Alejandro JA

Journal of educational evaluation for health professions 20231120

<h4>Purpose</h4>We aimed to describe the performance and evaluate the educational value of justifications provided by artificial intelligence chatbots, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Bard, Claude, and Bing, on the Peruvian National Medical Licensing Examination (P-NLME).<h4>Methods</h4>This was a cross-sectional analytical study. On July 25, 2023, each multiple-choice question (MCQ) from the P-NLME was entered into each chatbot (GPT-3, GPT-4, Bing, Bard, and Claude) 3 times. Then, 4 medical educators ...[more]

PMID: 37981579

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChatGPT has shown impressive performance in national medical licensing examinations, such as the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), even passing it with expert-level performance. However, there is a lack of research on its performance in low-income countries' national licensing medical examinations. In Peru, where almost one out of three examinees fails the national licensing medical examination, ChatGPT has the potential to enhance medical education.ObjectiveWe aimed to assess the accuracy of ChatGPT using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination (Examen Nacional de Medicina [ENAM]). Additionally, we sought to identify factors associated with incorrect answers provided by ChatGPT.MethodsWe used the ENAM 2022 data set, which consisted of 180 multiple-choice questions, to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT. Various prompts were used, and accuracy was evaluated. The performance of ChatGPT was compared to that of a sample of 1025 examinees. Factors such as question type, Peruvian-specific knowledge, discrimination, difficulty, quality of questions, and subject were analyzed to determine their influence on incorrect answers. Questions that received incorrect answers underwent a three-step process involving different prompts to explore the potential impact of adding roles and context on ChatGPT's accuracy.ResultsGPT-4 achieved an accuracy of 86% on the ENAM, followed by GPT-3.5 with 77%. The accuracy obtained by the 1025 examinees was 55%. There was a fair agreement (κ=0.38) between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Moderate-to-high-difficulty questions were associated with incorrect answers in the crude and adjusted model for GPT-3.5 (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 2.73-15.95) and GPT-4 (OR 33.23, 95% CI 4.3-257.12). After reinputting questions that received incorrect answers, GPT-3.5 went from 41 (100%) to 12 (29%) incorrect answers, and GPT-4 from 25 (100%) to 4 (16%).ConclusionsOur study found that ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) can achieve expert-level performance on the ENAM, outperforming most of our examinees. We found fair agreement between both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Incorrect answers were associated with the difficulty of questions, which may resemble human performance. Furthermore, by reinputting questions that initially received incorrect answers with different prompts containing additional roles and context, ChatGPT achieved improved accuracy.

Project description:Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) necessitate specialized renal diets to prevent complications such as hyperkalemia and hyperphosphatemia. A comprehensive assessment of food components is pivotal, yet burdensome for healthcare providers. With evolving artificial intelligence (AI) technology, models such as ChatGPT, Bard AI, and Bing Chat can be instrumental in educating patients and assisting professionals. To gauge the efficacy of different AI models in discerning potassium and phosphorus content in foods, four AI models-ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4, Bard AI, and Bing Chat-were evaluated. A total of 240 food items, curated from the Mayo Clinic Renal Diet Handbook for CKD patients, were input into each model. These items were characterized by their potassium (149 items) and phosphorus (91 items) content. Each model was tasked to categorize the items into high or low potassium and high phosphorus content. The results were juxtaposed with the Mayo Clinic Renal Diet Handbook's recommendations. The concordance between repeated sessions was also evaluated to assess model consistency. Among the models tested, ChatGPT 4 displayed superior performance in identifying potassium content, correctly classifying 81% of the foods. It accurately discerned 60% of low potassium and 99% of high potassium foods. In comparison, ChatGPT 3.5 exhibited a 66% accuracy rate. Bard AI and Bing Chat models had an accuracy rate of 79% and 81%, respectively. Regarding phosphorus content, Bard AI stood out with a flawless 100% accuracy rate. ChatGPT 3.5 and Bing Chat recognized 85% and 89% of the high phosphorus foods correctly, while ChatGPT 4 registered a 77% accuracy rate. Emerging AI models manifest a diverse range of accuracy in discerning potassium and phosphorus content in foods suitable for CKD patients. ChatGPT 4, in particular, showed a marked improvement over its predecessor, especially in detecting potassium content. The Bard AI model exhibited exceptional precision for phosphorus identification. This study underscores the potential of AI models as efficient tools in renal dietary planning, though refinements are warranted for optimal utility.

Project description:BackgroundChatGPT (OpenAI) has gained considerable attention because of its natural and intuitive responses. ChatGPT sometimes writes plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers, as stated by OpenAI as a limitation. However, considering that ChatGPT is an interactive AI that has been trained to reduce the output of unethical sentences, the reliability of the training data is high and the usefulness of the output content is promising. Fortunately, in March 2023, a new version of ChatGPT, GPT-4, was released, which, according to internal evaluations, was expected to increase the likelihood of producing factual responses by 40% compared with its predecessor, GPT-3.5. The usefulness of this version of ChatGPT in English is widely appreciated. It is also increasingly being evaluated as a system for obtaining medical information in languages other than English. Although it does not reach a passing score on the national medical examination in Chinese, its accuracy is expected to gradually improve. Evaluation of ChatGPT with Japanese input is limited, although there have been reports on the accuracy of ChatGPT's answers to clinical questions regarding the Japanese Society of Hypertension guidelines and on the performance of the National Nursing Examination.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate whether ChatGPT can provide accurate diagnoses and medical knowledge for Japanese input.MethodsQuestions from the National Medical Licensing Examination (NMLE) in Japan, administered by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare in 2022, were used. All 400 questions were included. Exclusion criteria were figures and tables that ChatGPT could not recognize; only text questions were extracted. We instructed GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 to input the Japanese questions as they were and to output the correct answers for each question. The output of ChatGPT was verified by 2 general practice physicians. In case of discrepancies, they were checked by another physician to make a final decision. The overall performance was evaluated by calculating the percentage of correct answers output by GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.ResultsOf the 400 questions, 292 were analyzed. Questions containing charts, which are not supported by ChatGPT, were excluded. The correct response rate for GPT-4 was 81.5% (237/292), which was significantly higher than the rate for GPT-3.5, 42.8% (125/292). Moreover, GPT-4 surpassed the passing standard (>72%) for the NMLE, indicating its potential as a diagnostic and therapeutic decision aid for physicians.ConclusionsGPT-4 reached the passing standard for the NMLE in Japan, entered in Japanese, although it is limited to written questions. As the accelerated progress in the past few months has shown, the performance of the AI will improve as the large language model continues to learn more, and it may well become a decision support system for medical professionals by providing more accurate information.

Project description:The remarkable performance of ChatGPT, launched in November 2022, has significantly impacted the field of natural language processing, inspiring the application of large language models as supportive tools in clinical practice and research worldwide. Although GPT-3.5 recently scored high on the United States Medical Licensing Examination, its performance on medical licensing examinations of other nations, especially non-English speaking nations, has not been sufficiently evaluated. This study assessed GPT's performance on the National Medical Licensing Examination (NMLE) in Japan and compared it with the actual minimal passing rate for this exam. In particular, the performances of both the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models were considered for the comparative analysis. We initially used the GPT models and several prompts for 290 questions without image data from the 116th NMLE (held in February 2022 in Japan) to maximize the performance for delivering correct answers and explanations of the questions. Thereafter, we tested the performance of the best GPT model (GPT-4) with optimized prompts on a dataset of 262 questions without images from the latest 117th NMLE (held in February 2023). The best model with the optimized prompts scored 82.7% for the essential questions and 77.2% for the basic and clinical questions, both of which sufficed the minimum passing scoring rates of 80.0% and 74.6%, respectively. After an exploratory analysis of 56 incorrect answers from the model, we identified the three major factors contributing to the generation of the incorrect answers-insufficient medical knowledge, information on Japan-specific medical system and guidelines, and mathematical errors. In conclusion, GPT-4 with our optimized prompts achieved a minimum passing scoring rate in the latest 117th NMLE in Japan. Beyond its original design of answering examination questions for humans, these artificial intelligence (AI) models can serve as one of the best "sidekicks" for solving problems and addressing the unmet needs in the medical and healthcare fields.

Project description:BackgroundThe increasing application of generative artificial intelligence large language models (LLMs) in various fields, including dentistry, raises questions about their accuracy.ObjectiveThis study aims to comparatively evaluate the answers provided by 4 LLMs, namely Bard (Google LLC), ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI), and Bing Chat (Microsoft Corp), to clinically relevant questions from the field of dentistry.MethodsThe LLMs were queried with 20 open-type, clinical dentistry-related questions from different disciplines, developed by the respective faculty of the School of Dentistry, European University Cyprus. The LLMs' answers were graded 0 (minimum) to 10 (maximum) points against strong, traditionally collected scientific evidence, such as guidelines and consensus statements, using a rubric, as if they were examination questions posed to students, by 2 experienced faculty members. The scores were statistically compared to identify the best-performing model using the Friedman and Wilcoxon tests. Moreover, the evaluators were asked to provide a qualitative evaluation of the comprehensiveness, scientific accuracy, clarity, and relevance of the LLMs' answers.ResultsOverall, no statistically significant difference was detected between the scores given by the 2 evaluators; therefore, an average score was computed for every LLM. Although ChatGPT-4 statistically outperformed ChatGPT-3.5 (P=.008), Bing Chat (P=.049), and Bard (P=.045), all models occasionally exhibited inaccuracies, generality, outdated content, and a lack of source references. The evaluators noted instances where the LLMs delivered irrelevant information, vague answers, or information that was not fully accurate.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that although LLMs hold promising potential as an aid in the implementation of evidence-based dentistry, their current limitations can lead to potentially harmful health care decisions if not used judiciously. Therefore, these tools should not replace the dentist's critical thinking and in-depth understanding of the subject matter. Further research, clinical validation, and model improvements are necessary for these tools to be fully integrated into dental practice. Dental practitioners must be aware of the limitations of LLMs, as their imprudent use could potentially impact patient care. Regulatory measures should be established to oversee the use of these evolving technologies.

Project description:BackgroundLarge language models (LLMs) are emerging artificial intelligence (AI) technologies refining research and healthcare. However, the impact of these models on presurgical planning and education remains under-explored.ObjectivesThis study aims to assess 3 prominent LLMs-Google's AI BARD (Mountain View, CA), Bing AI (Microsoft, Redmond, WA), and ChatGPT-3.5 (Open AI, San Francisco, CA) in providing safe medical information for rhinoplasty.MethodsSix questions regarding rhinoplasty were prompted to ChatGPT, BARD, and Bing AI. A Likert scale was used to evaluate these responses by a panel of Specialist Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons with extensive experience in rhinoplasty. To measure reliability, the Flesch Reading Ease Score, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and the Coleman-Liau Index were used. The modified DISCERN score was chosen as the criterion for assessing suitability and reliability. A t test was performed to calculate the difference between the LLMs, and a double-sided P-value <.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsIn terms of reliability, BARD and ChatGPT demonstrated a significantly (P < .05) greater Flesch Reading Ease Score of 47.47 (±15.32) and 37.68 (±12.96), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 9.7 (±3.12) and 10.15 (±1.84), and a Coleman-Liau Index of 10.83 (±2.14) and 12.17 (±1.17) than Bing AI. In terms of suitability, BARD (46.3 ± 2.8) demonstrated a significantly greater DISCERN score than ChatGPT and Bing AI. In terms of Likert score, ChatGPT and BARD demonstrated similar scores and were greater than Bing AI.ConclusionsBARD delivered the most succinct and comprehensible information, followed by ChatGPT and Bing AI. Although these models demonstrate potential, challenges regarding their depth and specificity remain. Therefore, future research should aim to augment LLM performance through the integration of specialized databases and expert knowledge, while also refining their algorithms.Level of evidence 5

Dataset Information

Performance of ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, and Bing on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination: a cross-sectional study.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Performance of ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, and Bing on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination: a cross-sectional study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets