This study aimed to compare the knowledge and interpretation ability of ChatGPT, a language model of artificial general intelligence, with those of medical students in Korea by administering a parasitology examination to both ChatGPT and medical students. The examination consisted of 79 items and was administered to ChatGPT on January 1, 2023. The examination results were analyzed in terms of ChatGPT’s overall performance score, its correct answer rate by the items’ knowledge level, and the acceptability of its explanations of the items. ChatGPT’s performance was lower than that of the medical students, and ChatGPT’s correct answer rate was not related to the items’ knowledge level. However, there was a relationship between acceptable explanations and correct answers. In conclusion, ChatGPT’s knowledge and interpretation ability for this parasitology examination were not yet comparable to those of medical students in Korea.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
ChatGPT and the AI revolution: a comprehensive investigation of its multidimensional impact and potential Mohd Afjal Library Hi Tech.2025; 43(1): 353. CrossRef
Utility of ChatGPT as a preparation tool for the Orthopaedic In‐Training Examination Dhruv Mendiratta, Isabel Herzog, Rohan Singh, Ashok Para, Tej Joshi, Michael Vosbikian, Neil Kaushal Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Exploring knowledge, attitudes, and practices of academics in the field of educational sciences towards using ChatGPT Burcu Karafil, Ahmet Uyar Education and Information Technologies.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Factors influencing Chinese pre-service teachers’ adoption of generative AI in teaching: an empirical study based on UTAUT2 and PLS-SEM Linlin Hu, Hao Wang, Yunfei Xin Education and Information Technologies.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Integrating AI Technology Into Language Teacher Education: Challenges, Potentials, and Assumptions Rod Case, Leping Liu, Joseph Mintz Computers in the Schools.2025; : 1. CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 in the Taiwan National Pharmacist Licensing Examination: Comparative Evaluation Study Ying-Mei Wang, Hung-Wei Shen, Tzeng-Ji Chen, Shu-Chiung Chiang, Ting-Guan Lin JMIR Medical Education.2025; 11: e56850. CrossRef
Unveiling the impact of ChatGPT: investigating self-efficacy, anxiety and motivation on student performance in blended learning environments Ridwan Daud Mahande, M. Miftach Fakhri, Irwansyah Suwahyu, Dwi Rezky Anandari Sulaiman Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Eight Months into Reality: A Scoping Review of the Application of ChatGPT in Higher Education Teaching and Learning Qian Liu, Anjin Hu, Tehmina Gladman, Steve Gallagher Innovative Higher Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of artificial intelligence on Turkish dental specialization exam: can ChatGPT-4.0 and gemini advanced achieve comparable results to humans? Soner Sismanoglu, Belen Sirinoglu Capan BMC Medical Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluation of the performance of ChatGPT‐4 and ChatGPT‐4o as a learning tool in endodontics Esra Arılı Öztürk, Ceren Turan Gökduman, Burhan Can Çanakçi International Endodontic Journal.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: A Systematic Review Eric Hallquist, Ishank Gupta, Michael Montalbano, Marios Loukas Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT-4 on Taiwanese Traditional Chinese Medicine Licensing Examinations: Cross-Sectional Study Liang-Wei Tseng, Yi-Chin Lu, Liang-Chi Tseng, Yu-Chun Chen, Hsing-Yu Chen JMIR Medical Education.2025; 11: e58897. CrossRef
Comparing diagnostic skills in endodontic cases: dental students versus ChatGPT-4o Parla Meva Durmazpinar, Ece Ekmekci BMC Oral Health.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating the agreement between ChatGPT-4 and validated questionnaires in screening for anxiety and depression in college students: a cross-sectional study Jiali Liu, Juan Gu, Mengjie Tong, Yake Yue, Yufei Qiu, Lijuan Zeng, Yiqing Yu, Fen Yang, Shuyan Zhao BMC Psychiatry.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT on the India Undergraduate Community Medicine Examination: Cross-Sectional Study Aravind P Gandhi, Felista Karen Joesph, Vineeth Rajagopal, P Aparnavi, Sushma Katkuri, Sonal Dayama, Prakasini Satapathy, Mahalaqua Nazli Khatib, Shilpa Gaidhane, Quazi Syed Zahiruddin, Ashish Behera JMIR Formative Research.2024; 8: e49964. CrossRef
Large Language Models and Artificial Intelligence: A Primer for Plastic Surgeons on the Demonstrated and Potential Applications, Promises, and Limitations of ChatGPT Jad Abi-Rafeh, Hong Hao Xu, Roy Kazan, Ruth Tevlin, Heather Furnas Aesthetic Surgery Journal.2024; 44(3): 329. CrossRef
Redesigning Tertiary Educational Evaluation with AI: A Task-Based Analysis of LIS Students’ Assessment on Written Tests and Utilizing ChatGPT at NSTU Shamima Yesmin Science & Technology Libraries.2024; 43(4): 355. CrossRef
Unveiling the ChatGPT phenomenon: Evaluating the consistency and accuracy of endodontic question answers Ana Suárez, Víctor Díaz‐Flores García, Juan Algar, Margarita Gómez Sánchez, María Llorente de Pedro, Yolanda Freire International Endodontic Journal.2024; 57(1): 108. CrossRef
Bob or Bot: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers to University Computer Science Assessment Mike Richards, Kevin Waugh, Mark Slaymaker, Marian Petre, John Woodthorpe, Daniel Gooch ACM Transactions on Computing Education.2024; 24(1): 1. CrossRef
A systematic review of ChatGPT use in K‐12 education Peng Zhang, Gemma Tur European Journal of Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating ChatGPT as a self‐learning tool in medical biochemistry: A performance assessment in undergraduate medical university examination Krishna Mohan Surapaneni, Anusha Rajajagadeesan, Lakshmi Goudhaman, Shalini Lakshmanan, Saranya Sundaramoorthi, Dineshkumar Ravi, Kalaiselvi Rajendiran, Porchelvan Swaminathan Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education.2024; 52(2): 237. CrossRef
Examining the use of ChatGPT in public universities in Hong Kong: a case study of restricted access areas Michelle W. T. Cheng, Iris H. Y. YIM Discover Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT on Ophthalmology-Related Questions Across Various Examination Levels: Observational Study Firas Haddad, Joanna S Saade JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e50842. CrossRef
Assessment of Artificial Intelligence Platforms With Regard to Medical Microbiology Knowledge: An Analysis of ChatGPT and Gemini Jai Ranjan, Absar Ahmad, Monalisa Subudhi, Ajay Kumar Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
A comparative vignette study: Evaluating the potential role of a generative AI model in enhancing clinical decision‐making in nursing Mor Saban, Ilana Dubovi Journal of Advanced Nursing.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of the Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 With That of Medical Students on the Written German Medical Licensing Examination: Observational Study Annika Meyer, Janik Riese, Thomas Streichert JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e50965. CrossRef
From hype to insight: Exploring ChatGPT's early footprint in education via altmetrics and bibliometrics Lung‐Hsiang Wong, Hyejin Park, Chee‐Kit Looi Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.2024; 40(4): 1428. CrossRef
A scoping review of artificial intelligence in medical education: BEME Guide No. 84 Morris Gordon, Michelle Daniel, Aderonke Ajiboye, Hussein Uraiby, Nicole Y. Xu, Rangana Bartlett, Janice Hanson, Mary Haas, Maxwell Spadafore, Ciaran Grafton-Clarke, Rayhan Yousef Gasiea, Colin Michie, Janet Corral, Brian Kwan, Diana Dolmans, Satid Thamma Medical Teacher.2024; 46(4): 446. CrossRef
Üniversite Öğrencilerinin ChatGPT 3,5 Deneyimleri: Yapay Zekâyla Yazılmış Masal Varyantları Bilge GÖK, Fahri TEMİZYÜREK, Özlem BAŞ Korkut Ata Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi.2024; (14): 1040. CrossRef
Tracking ChatGPT Research: Insights From the Literature and the Web Omar Mubin, Fady Alnajjar, Zouheir Trabelsi, Luqman Ali, Medha Mohan Ambali Parambil, Zhao Zou IEEE Access.2024; 12: 30518. CrossRef
Potential applications of ChatGPT in obstetrics and gynecology in Korea: a review article YooKyung Lee, So Yun Kim Obstetrics & Gynecology Science.2024; 67(2): 153. CrossRef
Application of generative language models to orthopaedic practice Jessica Caterson, Olivia Ambler, Nicholas Cereceda-Monteoliva, Matthew Horner, Andrew Jones, Arwel Tomos Poacher BMJ Open.2024; 14(3): e076484. CrossRef
Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping review Xiaojun Xu, Yixiao Chen, Jing Miao Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 6. CrossRef
The advent of ChatGPT: Job Made Easy or Job Loss to Data Analysts Abiola Timothy Owolabi, Oluwaseyi Oluwadamilare Okunlola, Emmanuel Taiwo Adewuyi, Janet Iyabo Idowu, Olasunkanmi James Oladapo WSEAS TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTERS.2024; 23: 24. CrossRef
ChatGPT in dentomaxillofacial radiology education Hilal Peker Öztürk, Hakan Avsever, Buğra Şenel, Şükran Ayran, Mustafa Çağrı Peker, Hatice Seda Özgedik, Nurten Baysal Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine.2024; 7(2): 224. CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT on the Korean National Examination for Dental Hygienists Soo-Myoung Bae, Hye-Rim Jeon, Gyoung-Nam Kim, Seon-Hui Kwak, Hyo-Jin Lee Journal of Dental Hygiene Science.2024; 24(1): 62. CrossRef
Medical knowledge of ChatGPT in public health, infectious diseases, COVID-19 pandemic, and vaccines: multiple choice questions examination based performance Sultan Ayoub Meo, Metib Alotaibi, Muhammad Zain Sultan Meo, Muhammad Omair Sultan Meo, Mashhood Hamid Frontiers in Public Health.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Unlock the potential for Saudi Arabian higher education: a systematic review of the benefits of ChatGPT Eman Faisal Frontiers in Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Does the Information Quality of ChatGPT Meet the Requirements of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery? Adnan Kasapovic, Thaer Ali, Mari Babasiz, Jessica Bojko, Martin Gathen, Robert Kaczmarczyk, Jonas Roos Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Exploring the Profile of University Assessments Flagged as Containing AI-Generated Material Daniel Gooch, Kevin Waugh, Mike Richards, Mark Slaymaker, John Woodthorpe ACM Inroads.2024; 15(2): 39. CrossRef
Comparing the Performance of ChatGPT-4 and Medical Students on MCQs at Varied Levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy Ambadasu Bharatha, Nkemcho Ojeh, Ahbab Mohammad Fazle Rabbi, Michael Campbell, Kandamaran Krishnamurthy, Rhaheem Layne-Yarde, Alok Kumar, Dale Springer, Kenneth Connell, Md Anwarul Majumder Advances in Medical Education and Practice.2024; Volume 15: 393. CrossRef
The emergence of generative artificial intelligence platforms in 2023, journal metrics, appreciation to reviewers and volunteers, and obituary Sun Huh Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 9. CrossRef
ChatGPT, a Friend or a Foe in Medical Education: A Review of Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities Mahdi Zarei, Maryam Zarei, Sina Hamzehzadeh, Sepehr Shakeri Bavil Oliyaei, Mohammad-Salar Hosseini Shiraz E-Medical Journal.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Augmenting intensive care unit nursing practice with generative AI: A formative study of diagnostic synergies using simulation‐based clinical cases Chedva Levin, Moriya Suliman, Etti Naimi, Mor Saban Journal of Clinical Nursing.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial intelligence chatbots for the nutrition management of diabetes and the metabolic syndrome Farah Naja, Mandy Taktouk, Dana Matbouli, Sharfa Khaleel, Ayah Maher, Berna Uzun, Maryam Alameddine, Lara Nasreddine European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.2024; 78(10): 887. CrossRef
Large language models in healthcare: from a systematic review on medical examinations to a comparative analysis on fundamentals of robotic surgery online test Andrea Moglia, Konstantinos Georgiou, Pietro Cerveri, Luca Mainardi, Richard M. Satava, Alfred Cuschieri Artificial Intelligence Review.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Is ChatGPT Enhancing Youth’s Learning, Engagement and Satisfaction? Christina Sanchita Shah, Smriti Mathur, Sushant Kr. Vishnoi Journal of Computer Information Systems.2024; : 1. CrossRef
Comparison of ChatGPT, Gemini, and Le Chat with physician interpretations of medical laboratory questions from an online health forum Annika Meyer, Ari Soleman, Janik Riese, Thomas Streichert Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM).2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in national licensing examinations for medicine, pharmacy, dentistry, and nursing: a systematic review and meta-analysis Hye Kyung Jin, Ha Eun Lee, EunYoung Kim BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Role of ChatGPT in Dentistry: A Review Pratik Surana, Priyanka P. Ostwal, Shruti Vishal Dev, Jayesh Tiwari, Kadire Shiva Charan Yadav, Gajji Renuka Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology.2024; : 3489. CrossRef
Exploring the Current Applications and Effectiveness of ChatGPT in Nursing: An Integrative Review Yuan Luo, Yiqun Miao, Yuhan Zhao, Jiawei Li, Ying Wu Journal of Advanced Nursing.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
A Scoping Review on the Educational Applications of Generative AI in Primary and Secondary Education Solmoe Ahn, Jeongyoon Lee, Jungmin Park, Soyoung Jung, Jihoon Song The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education.2024; 27(6): 11. CrossRef
Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the Korean Pharmacist Licensing Examination: Comparison Study Hye Kyung Jin, EunYoung Kim JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e57451. CrossRef
ChatGPT-Produced Content as a Resource in the Language Education Classroom: A Guiding Hand Rod E. Case, Leping Liu Computers in the Schools.2024; : 1. CrossRef
Evaluating the Feasibility of ChatGPT in Dental Morphology Education: A Pilot Study on AI-Assisted Learning in Dental Morphology Eun-Young Jeon, Hyun-Na Ahn, Jeong-Hyun Lee Journal of Dental Hygiene Science.2024; 24(4): 309. CrossRef
Detecting AI- generated versus human- written medical student essays: a semi-randomized controlled study (Preprint) Berin Doru, Christoph Maier, Johanna Sophie Busse, Thomas Lücke, Judith Schönhoff, Elena Enax- Krumova, Steffen Hessler, Maria Berger, Marianne Tokic JMIR Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Is ChatGPT reliable in education? Amal Abdullah Alibrahim South African Journal of Education.2024; 44(4): 1. CrossRef
Applicability of ChatGPT in Assisting to Solve Higher Order Problems in Pathology Ranwir K Sinha, Asitava Deb Roy, Nikhil Kumar, Himel Mondal Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Issues in the 3rd year of the COVID-19 pandemic, including computer-based testing, study design, ChatGPT, journal metrics, and appreciation to reviewers Sun Huh Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 5. CrossRef
Emergence of the metaverse and ChatGPT in journal publishing after the COVID-19 pandemic Sun Huh Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 1. CrossRef
Assessing the Capability of ChatGPT in Answering First- and Second-Order Knowledge Questions on Microbiology as per Competency-Based Medical Education Curriculum Dipmala Das, Nikhil Kumar, Langamba Angom Longjam, Ranwir Sinha, Asitava Deb Roy, Himel Mondal, Pratima Gupta Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating ChatGPT's Ability to Solve Higher-Order Questions on the Competency-Based Medical Education Curriculum in Medical Biochemistry Arindam Ghosh, Aritri Bir Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Overview of Early ChatGPT’s Presence in Medical Literature: Insights From a Hybrid Literature Review by ChatGPT and Human Experts Omar Temsah, Samina A Khan, Yazan Chaiah, Abdulrahman Senjab, Khalid Alhasan, Amr Jamal, Fadi Aljamaan, Khalid H Malki, Rabih Halwani, Jaffar A Al-Tawfiq, Mohamad-Hani Temsah, Ayman Al-Eyadhy Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT for Future Medical and Dental Research Bader Fatani Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT in Dentistry: A Comprehensive Review Hind M Alhaidry, Bader Fatani, Jenan O Alrayes, Aljowhara M Almana, Nawaf K Alfhaed Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Can we trust AI chatbots’ answers about disease diagnosis and patient care? Sun Huh Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2023; 66(4): 218. CrossRef
Large Language Models in Medical Education: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions Alaa Abd-alrazaq, Rawan AlSaad, Dari Alhuwail, Arfan Ahmed, Padraig Mark Healy, Syed Latifi, Sarah Aziz, Rafat Damseh, Sadam Alabed Alrazak, Javaid Sheikh JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e48291. CrossRef
Early applications of ChatGPT in medical practice, education and research Sam Sedaghat Clinical Medicine.2023; 23(3): 278. CrossRef
A Review of Research on Teaching and Learning Transformation under the Influence of ChatGPT Technology 璇 师 Advances in Education.2023; 13(05): 2617. CrossRef
Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the Japanese Medical Licensing Examination: Comparison Study Soshi Takagi, Takashi Watari, Ayano Erabi, Kota Sakaguchi JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e48002. CrossRef
ChatGPT’s quiz skills in different otolaryngology subspecialties: an analysis of 2576 single-choice and multiple-choice board certification preparation questions Cosima C. Hoch, Barbara Wollenberg, Jan-Christoffer Lüers, Samuel Knoedler, Leonard Knoedler, Konstantin Frank, Sebastian Cotofana, Michael Alfertshofer European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.2023; 280(9): 4271. CrossRef
Analysing the Applicability of ChatGPT, Bard, and Bing to Generate Reasoning-Based Multiple-Choice Questions in Medical Physiology Mayank Agarwal, Priyanka Sharma, Ayan Goswami Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The Intersection of ChatGPT, Clinical Medicine, and Medical Education Rebecca Shin-Yee Wong, Long Chiau Ming, Raja Affendi Raja Ali JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e47274. CrossRef
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: ChatGPT Assessment for Anatomy Course Tarık TALAN, Yusuf KALINKARA Uluslararası Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri ve Bilgisayar Bilimleri Dergisi.2023; 7(1): 33. CrossRef
Comparing ChatGPT’s ability to rate the degree of stereotypes and the consistency of stereotype attribution with those of medical students in New Zealand in developing a similarity rating test: a methodological study Chao-Cheng Lin, Zaine Akuhata-Huntington, Che-Wei Hsu Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 17. CrossRef
Assessing the Efficacy of ChatGPT in Solving Questions Based on the Core Concepts in Physiology Arijita Banerjee, Aquil Ahmad, Payal Bhalla, Kavita Goyal Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT Performs on the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination Xinyi Wang, Zhenye Gong, Guoxin Wang, Jingdan Jia, Ying Xu, Jialu Zhao, Qingye Fan, Shaun Wu, Weiguo Hu, Xiaoyang Li Journal of Medical Systems.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial intelligence and its impact on job opportunities among university students in North Lima, 2023 Doris Ruiz-Talavera, Jaime Enrique De la Cruz-Aguero, Nereo García-Palomino, Renzo Calderón-Espinoza, William Joel Marín-Rodriguez ICST Transactions on Scalable Information Systems.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Revolutionizing Dental Care: A Comprehensive Review of Artificial Intelligence Applications Among Various Dental Specialties Najd Alzaid, Omar Ghulam, Modhi Albani, Rafa Alharbi, Mayan Othman, Hasan Taher, Saleem Albaradie, Suhael Ahmed Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Scoping Review Carl Preiksaitis, Christian Rose JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e48785. CrossRef
Exploring the impact of language models, such as ChatGPT, on student learning and assessment Araz Zirar Review of Education.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating the reliability of ChatGPT as a tool for imaging test referral: a comparative study with a clinical decision support system Shani Rosen, Mor Saban European Radiology.2023; 34(5): 2826. CrossRef
The Significance of Artificial Intelligence Platforms in Anatomy Education: An Experience With ChatGPT and Google Bard Hasan B Ilgaz, Zehra Çelik Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Is ChatGPT’s Knowledge and Interpretative Ability Comparable to First Professional MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery) Students of India in Taking a Medical Biochemistry Examination? Abhra Ghosh, Nandita Maini Jindal, Vikram K Gupta, Ekta Bansal, Navjot Kaur Bajwa, Abhishek Sett Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Ethical consideration of the use of generative artificial intelligence, including ChatGPT in writing a nursing article Sun Huh Child Health Nursing Research.2023; 29(4): 249. CrossRef
Potential Use of ChatGPT for Patient Information in Periodontology: A Descriptive Pilot Study Osman Babayiğit, Zeynep Tastan Eroglu, Dilek Ozkan Sen, Fatma Ucan Yarkac Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficacy and limitations of ChatGPT as a biostatistical problem-solving tool in medical education in Serbia: a descriptive study Aleksandra Ignjatović, Lazar Stevanović Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 28. CrossRef
Assessing the Performance of ChatGPT in Medical Biochemistry Using Clinical Case Vignettes: Observational Study Krishna Mohan Surapaneni JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e47191. CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, and Bing on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination: a cross-sectional study Betzy Clariza Torres-Zegarra, Wagner Rios-Garcia, Alvaro Micael Ñaña-Cordova, Karen Fatima Arteaga-Cisneros, Xiomara Cristina Benavente Chalco, Marina Atena Bustamante Ordoñez, Carlos Jesus Gutierrez Rios, Carlos Alberto Ramos Godoy, Kristell Luisa Teresa Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 30. CrossRef
ChatGPT’s performance in German OB/GYN exams – paving the way for AI-enhanced medical education and clinical practice Maximilian Riedel, Katharina Kaefinger, Antonia Stuehrenberg, Viktoria Ritter, Niklas Amann, Anna Graf, Florian Recker, Evelyn Klein, Marion Kiechle, Fabian Riedel, Bastian Meyer Frontiers in Medicine.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Medical students’ patterns of using ChatGPT as a feedback tool and perceptions of ChatGPT in a Leadership and Communication course in Korea: a cross-sectional study Janghee Park Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 29. CrossRef
FROM TEXT TO DIAGNOSE: CHATGPT’S EFFICACY IN MEDICAL DECISION-MAKING Yaroslav Mykhalko, Pavlo Kish, Yelyzaveta Rubtsova, Oleksandr Kutsyn, Valentyna Koval Wiadomości Lekarskie.2023; 76(11): 2345. CrossRef
Using ChatGPT for Clinical Practice and Medical Education: Cross-Sectional Survey of Medical Students’ and Physicians’ Perceptions Pasin Tangadulrat, Supinya Sono, Boonsin Tangtrakulwanich JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e50658. CrossRef
Below average ChatGPT performance in medical microbiology exam compared to university students Malik Sallam, Khaled Al-Salahat Frontiers in Education.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT: "To be or not to be" ... in academic research. The human mind's analytical rigor and capacity to discriminate between AI bots' truths and hallucinations Aurelian Anghelescu, Ilinca Ciobanu, Constantin Munteanu, Lucia Ana Maria Anghelescu, Gelu Onose Balneo and PRM Research Journal.2023; 14(Vol.14, no): 614. CrossRef
ChatGPT Review: A Sophisticated Chatbot Models in Medical & Health-related Teaching and Learning Nur Izah Ab Razak, Muhammad Fawwaz Muhammad Yusoff, Rahmita Wirza O.K. Rahmat Malaysian Journal of Medicine and Health Sciences.2023; 19(s12): 98. CrossRef
Application of artificial intelligence chatbots, including ChatGPT, in education, scholarly work, programming, and content generation and its prospects: a narrative review Tae Won Kim Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 38. CrossRef
Trends in research on ChatGPT and adoption-related issues discussed in articles: a narrative review Sang-Jun Kim Science Editing.2023; 11(1): 3. CrossRef
Information amount, accuracy, and relevance of generative artificial intelligence platforms’ answers regarding learning objectives of medical arthropodology evaluated in English and Korean queries in December 2023: a descriptive study Hyunju Lee, Soobin Park Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 39. CrossRef
What will ChatGPT revolutionize in the financial industry? Hassnian Ali, Ahmet Faruk Aysan Modern Finance.2023; 1(1): 116. CrossRef
At the end of 2022, the appearance of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot with amazing writing ability, caused a great sensation in academia. The chatbot turned out to be very capable, but also capable of deception, and the news broke that several researchers had listed the chatbot (including its earlier version) as co-authors of their academic papers. In response, Nature and Science expressed their position that this chatbot cannot be listed as an author in the papers they publish. Since an AI chatbot is not a human being, in the current legal system, the text automatically generated by an AI chatbot cannot be a copyrighted work; thus, an AI chatbot cannot be an author of a copyrighted work. Current AI chatbots such as ChatGPT are much more advanced than search engines in that they produce original text, but they still remain at the level of a search engine in that they cannot take responsibility for their writing. For this reason, they also cannot be authors from the perspective of research ethics.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Identification of ChatGPT-Generated Abstracts Within Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Poses a Challenge for Reviewers Ryan D. Stadler, Suleiman Y. Sudah, Michael A. Moverman, Patrick J. Denard, Xavier A. Duralde, Grant E. Garrigues, Christopher S. Klifto, Jonathan C. Levy, Surena Namdari, Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo, Mariano E. Menendez Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery.2025; 41(4): 916. CrossRef
Attitudes and perceptions of medical researchers towards the use of artificial intelligence chatbots in the scientific process: an international cross-sectional survey Jeremy Y Ng, Sharleen G Maduranayagam, Nirekah Suthakar, Amy Li, Cynthia Lokker, Alfonso Iorio, R Brian Haynes, David Moher The Lancet Digital Health.2025; 7(1): e94. CrossRef
Introducing Our Custom GPT: An Example of the Potential Impact of Personalized GPT Builders on Scientific Writing Aymen Kabir, Suraj Shah, Alexander Haddad, Daniel M.S. Raper World Neurosurgery.2025; 193: 461. CrossRef
Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Medical Writing: Balancing Technological Innovation and Human Expertise, with Practical Applications in Lower Extremity Wounds Care Pak Thaichana, Myo Zin Oo, Gabriel Leiden Thorup, Chayatorn Chansakaow, Supapong Arworn, Kittipan Rerkasem The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Ethical issues and violations in using chatbots in academic writing and publishing: the answers from ChatGPT Eren Erkılıç, Ibrahim Cifci Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Tourism.2025; 10(1): 111. CrossRef
Chat GPT vs an experienced ophthalmologist: evaluating chatbot writing performance in ophthalmology Gabriel Katz, Ofira Zloto, Avner Hostovsky, Ruth Huna-Baron, Iris Ben-Bassat Mizrachi, Zvia Burgansky, Alon Skaat, Vicktoria Vishnevskia-Dai, Ido Didi Fabian, Oded Sagiv, Ayelet Priel, Benjamin S. Glicksberg, Eyal Klang Eye.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of hand surgery certification exams in Europe and the United States using ChatGPT 4.0 Salman Hasan, Kyros Ipaktchi, Nicolas Meyer, Philippe Liverneaux Journal of Hand and Microsurgery.2025; 17(4): 100258. CrossRef
Risks of abuse of large language models, like ChatGPT, in scientific publishing: Authorship, predatory publishing, and paper mills Graham Kendall, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva Learned Publishing.2024; 37(1): 55. CrossRef
Can ChatGPT be an author? A study of artificial intelligence authorship policies in top academic journals Brady D. Lund, K.T. Naheem Learned Publishing.2024; 37(1): 13. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence–Generated Scientific Literature: A Critical Appraisal Justyna Zybaczynska, Matthew Norris, Sunjay Modi, Jennifer Brennan, Pooja Jhaveri, Timothy J. Craig, Taha Al-Shaikhly The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice.2024; 12(1): 106. CrossRef
Does Google’s Bard Chatbot perform better than ChatGPT on the European hand surgery exam? Goetsch Thibaut, Armaghan Dabbagh, Philippe Liverneaux International Orthopaedics.2024; 48(1): 151. CrossRef
ChatGPT in medical writing: A game-changer or a gimmick? Shital Sarah Ahaley, Ankita Pandey, Simran Kaur Juneja, Tanvi Suhane Gupta, Sujatha Vijayakumar Perspectives in Clinical Research.2024; 15(4): 165. CrossRef
A Brief Review of the Efficacy in Artificial Intelligence and Chatbot-Generated Personalized Fitness Regimens Daniel K. Bays, Cole Verble, Kalyn M. Powers Verble Strength & Conditioning Journal.2024; 46(4): 485. CrossRef
Academic publisher guidelines on AI usage: A ChatGPT supported thematic analysis Mike Perkins, Jasper Roe F1000Research.2024; 12: 1398. CrossRef
The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Writing Scientific Review Articles Melissa A. Kacena, Lilian I. Plotkin, Jill C. Fehrenbacher Current Osteoporosis Reports.2024; 22(1): 115. CrossRef
Using AI to Write a Review Article Examining the Role of the Nervous System on Skeletal Homeostasis and Fracture Healing Murad K. Nazzal, Ashlyn J. Morris, Reginald S. Parker, Fletcher A. White, Roman M. Natoli, Jill C. Fehrenbacher, Melissa A. Kacena Current Osteoporosis Reports.2024; 22(1): 217. CrossRef
GenAI et al.: Cocreation, Authorship, Ownership, Academic Ethics and Integrity in a Time of Generative AI Aras Bozkurt Open Praxis.2024; 16(1): 1. CrossRef
An integrative decision-making framework to guide policies on regulating ChatGPT usage Umar Ali Bukar, Md Shohel Sayeed, Siti Fatimah Abdul Razak, Sumendra Yogarayan, Oluwatosin Ahmed Amodu PeerJ Computer Science.2024; 10: e1845. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence and Its Role in Medical Research Anurag Gola, Ambarish Das, Amar B. Gumataj, S. Amirdhavarshini, J. Venkatachalam Current Medical Issues.2024; 22(2): 97. CrossRef
From advancements to ethics: Assessing ChatGPT’s role in writing research paper Vasu Gupta, Fnu Anamika, Kinna Parikh, Meet A Patel, Rahul Jain, Rohit Jain Turkish Journal of Internal Medicine.2024; 6(2): 74. CrossRef
Yapay Zekânın Edebiyatta Kullanım Serüveni Nesime Ceyhan Akça, Serap Aslan Cobutoğlu, Özlem Yeşim Özbek, Mehmet Furkan Akça RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi.2024; (39): 283. CrossRef
ChatGPT's Gastrointestinal Tumor Board Tango: A limping dance partner? Ughur Aghamaliyev, Javad Karimbayli, Clemens Giessen-Jung, Matthias Ilmer, Kristian Unger, Dorian Andrade, Felix O. Hofmann, Maximilian Weniger, Martin K. Angele, C. Benedikt Westphalen, Jens Werner, Bernhard W. Renz European Journal of Cancer.2024; 205: 114100. CrossRef
Gout and Gout-Related Comorbidities: Insight and Limitations from Population-Based Registers in Sweden Panagiota Drivelegka, Lennart TH Jacobsson, Mats Dehlin Gout, Urate, and Crystal Deposition Disease.2024; 2(2): 144. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence in academic cardiothoracic surgery Adham AHMED, Irbaz HAMEED The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The emergence of generative artificial intelligence platforms in 2023, journal metrics, appreciation to reviewers and volunteers, and obituary Sun Huh Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 9. CrossRef
A survey of safety and trustworthiness of large language models through the lens of verification and validation Xiaowei Huang, Wenjie Ruan, Wei Huang, Gaojie Jin, Yi Dong, Changshun Wu, Saddek Bensalem, Ronghui Mu, Yi Qi, Xingyu Zhao, Kaiwen Cai, Yanghao Zhang, Sihao Wu, Peipei Xu, Dengyu Wu, Andre Freitas, Mustafa A. Mustafa Artificial Intelligence Review.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Decision-Making Framework for the Utilization of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Case Study of ChatGPT Umar Ali Bukar, Md. Shohel Sayeed, Siti Fatimah Abdul Razak, Sumendra Yogarayan, Radhwan Sneesl IEEE Access.2024; 12: 95368. CrossRef
ChatGPT or Gemini: Who Makes the Better Scientific Writing Assistant? Hatoon S. AlSagri, Faiza Farhat, Shahab Saquib Sohail, Abdul Khader Jilani Saudagar Journal of Academic Ethics.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The Syntax of Smart Writing: Artificial Intelligence Unveiled Balaji Arumugam, Arun Murugan, Kirubakaran S., Saranya Rajamanickam International Journal of Preventative & Evidence Based Medicine.2024; : 1. CrossRef
Generative artificial intelligence usage by researchers at work: Effects of gender, career stage, type of workplace, and perceived barriers Pablo Dorta-González, Alexis Jorge López-Puig, María Isabel Dorta-González, Sara M. González-Betancor Telematics and Informatics.2024; 94: 102187. CrossRef
Leveraging Artificial Intelligence In Project-Based Service Learning To Advance Sustainable Development: A Pedagogical Approach For Marketing Education C. M. Dubay, Melanie B. Richards Marketing Education Review.2024; 34(4): 307. CrossRef
Let stochastic parrots squawk: why academic journals should allow large language models to coauthor articles Nicholas J. Abernethy AI and Ethics.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Can ChatGPT be an author? Generative AI creative writing assistance and perceptions of authorship, creatorship, responsibility, and disclosure Paul Formosa, Sarah Bankins, Rita Matulionyte, Omid Ghasemi AI & SOCIETY.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Strategies for integrating ChatGPT and generative AI into clinical studies Jeong-Moo Lee Blood Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Universal skepticism of ChatGPT: a review of early literature on chat generative pre-trained transformer Casey Watters, Michal K. Lemanski Frontiers in Big Data.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The importance of human supervision in the use of ChatGPT as a support tool in scientific writing William Castillo-González Metaverse Basic and Applied Research.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT for Future Medical and Dental Research Bader Fatani Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Chatbots in Medical Research Punit Sharma Clinical Nuclear Medicine.2023; 48(9): 838. CrossRef
Potential applications of ChatGPT in dermatology Nicolas Kluger Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
The emergent role of artificial intelligence, natural learning processing, and large language models in higher education and research Tariq Alqahtani, Hisham A. Badreldin, Mohammed Alrashed, Abdulrahman I. Alshaya, Sahar S. Alghamdi, Khalid bin Saleh, Shuroug A. Alowais, Omar A. Alshaya, Ishrat Rahman, Majed S. Al Yami, Abdulkareem M. Albekairy Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy.2023; 19(8): 1236. CrossRef
ChatGPT Performance on the American Urological Association Self-assessment Study Program and the Potential Influence of Artificial Intelligence in Urologic Training Nicholas A. Deebel, Ryan Terlecki Urology.2023; 177: 29. CrossRef
Intelligence or artificial intelligence? More hard problems for authors of Biological Psychology, the neurosciences, and everyone else Thomas Ritz Biological Psychology.2023; 181: 108590. CrossRef
The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts Mohammad Hosseini, David B Resnik, Kristi Holmes Research Ethics.2023; 19(4): 449. CrossRef
How trustworthy is ChatGPT? The case of bibliometric analyses Faiza Farhat, Shahab Saquib Sohail, Dag Øivind Madsen Cogent Engineering.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Disclosing use of Artificial Intelligence: Promoting transparency in publishing Parvaiz A. Koul Lung India.2023; 40(5): 401. CrossRef
ChatGPT in medical research: challenging time ahead Daideepya C Bhargava, Devendra Jadav, Vikas P Meshram, Tanuj Kanchan Medico-Legal Journal.2023; 91(4): 223. CrossRef
Academic publisher guidelines on AI usage: A ChatGPT supported thematic analysis Mike Perkins, Jasper Roe F1000Research.2023; 12: 1398. CrossRef
The Role of AI in Writing an Article and Whether it Can Be a Co-author: What if it Gets Support From 2 Different AIs Like ChatGPT and Google Bard for the Same Theme? İlhan Bahşi, Ayşe Balat Journal of Craniofacial Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Ethical consideration of the use of generative artificial intelligence, including ChatGPT in writing a nursing article Sun Huh Child Health Nursing Research.2023; 29(4): 249. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence-Supported Systems in Anesthesiology and Its Standpoint to Date—A Review Fiona M. P. Pham Open Journal of Anesthesiology.2023; 13(07): 140. CrossRef
ChatGPT as an innovative tool for increasing sales in online stores Michał Orzoł, Katarzyna Szopik-Depczyńska Procedia Computer Science.2023; 225: 3450. CrossRef
Intelligent Plagiarism as a Misconduct in Academic Integrity Jesús Miguel Muñoz-Cantero, Eva Maria Espiñeira-Bellón Acta Médica Portuguesa.2023; 37(1): 1. CrossRef
Follow-up of Artificial Intelligence Development and its Controlled Contribution to the Article: Step to the Authorship? Ekrem Solmaz European Journal of Therapeutics.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
May Artificial Intelligence Be a Co-Author on an Academic Paper? Ayşe Balat, İlhan Bahşi European Journal of Therapeutics.2023; 29(3): e12. CrossRef
Opportunities and challenges for ChatGPT and large language models in biomedicine and health Shubo Tian, Qiao Jin, Lana Yeganova, Po-Ting Lai, Qingqing Zhu, Xiuying Chen, Yifan Yang, Qingyu Chen, Won Kim, Donald C Comeau, Rezarta Islamaj, Aadit Kapoor, Xin Gao, Zhiyong Lu Briefings in Bioinformatics.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT: "To be or not to be" ... in academic research. The human mind's analytical rigor and capacity to discriminate between AI bots' truths and hallucinations Aurelian Anghelescu, Ilinca Ciobanu, Constantin Munteanu, Lucia Ana Maria Anghelescu, Gelu Onose Balneo and PRM Research Journal.2023; 14(Vol.14, no): 614. CrossRef
Editorial policies of Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions on the use of generative artificial intelligence in article writing and peer review Sun Huh Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 40. CrossRef
Should We Wait for Major Frauds to Unveil to Plan an AI Use License? Istemihan Coban European Journal of Therapeutics.2023; 30(2): 198. CrossRef
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.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
PICOT questions and search strategies formulation: A novel approach using artificial intelligence automation Lucija Gosak, Gregor Štiglic, Lisiane Pruinelli, Dominika Vrbnjak Journal of Nursing Scholarship.2025; 57(1): 5. CrossRef
Using large language models (ChatGPT, Copilot, PaLM, Bard, and Gemini) in Gross Anatomy course: Comparative analysis Volodymyr Mavrych, Paul Ganguly, Olena Bolgova Clinical Anatomy.2025; 38(2): 200. CrossRef
Capable exam-taker and question-generator: the dual role of generative AI in medical education assessment Yihong Qiu, Chang Liu Global Medical Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of artificial intelligence systems in answering prosthodontics questions from the dental specialty exam in Turkey Busra Tosun, Zeynep Sen Yilmaz Journal of Dental Sciences.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Benchmarking LLM chatbots’ oncological knowledge with the Turkish Society of Medical Oncology’s annual board examination questions Efe Cem Erdat, Engin Eren Kavak BMC Cancer.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models in Anatomy Education Advancing Anatomy Learning with ChatGPT-4o Fatma Ok, Burak Karip, Fulya Temizsoy Korkmaz European Journal of Therapeutics.2025; 31(1): 35. CrossRef
Large Language Models in Biochemistry Education: Comparative Evaluation of Performance Olena Bolgova, Inna Shypilova, Volodymyr Mavrych JMIR Medical Education.2025; 11: e67244. CrossRef
Attributional patterns toward students with and without learning disabilities: Artificial intelligence models vs. trainee teachers Inbar Levkovich, Eyal Rabin, Rania Hussein Farraj, Zohar Elyoseph Research in Developmental Disabilities.2025; 160: 104970. CrossRef
The double-edged sword of generative AI: surpassing an expert or a deceptive “false friend”? Franziska C.S. Altorfer, Michael J. Kelly, Fedan Avrumova, Varun Rohatgi, Jiaqi Zhu, Christopher M. Bono, Darren R. Lebl The Spine Journal.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Claude, ChatGPT, Copilot, and Gemini performance versus students in different topics of neuroscience Volodymyr Mavrych, Ahmed Yaqinuddin, Olena Bolgova Advances in Physiology Education.2025; 49(2): 430. CrossRef
Large Language Models Take on the AAMC Situational Judgment Test: Evaluating Dilemma-Based Scenarios Angelo Cadiente, Jamie Chen, Lora J. Kasselman, Bryan Pilkington International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Validation of a generative artificial intelligence tool for the critical appraisal of articles on the epidemiology of mental health: Its application in the Middle East and North Africa Cheima Moussa, Sarah Altayyar, Marion Vergonjeanne, Thibaut Gelle, Pierre-Marie Preux Journal of Epidemiology and Population Health.2025; 73(2): 202990. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence (AI) performance on pharmacy skills laboratory course assignments Vivian Do, Krista L. Donohoe, Apryl N. Peddi, Eleanor Carr, Christina Kim, Virginia Mele, Dhruv Patel, Alexis N. Crawford Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning.2025; 17(7): 102367. CrossRef
Performance of GPT-4V in Answering the Japanese Otolaryngology Board Certification Examination Questions: Evaluation Study Masao Noda, Takayoshi Ueno, Ryota Koshu, Yuji Takaso, Mari Dias Shimada, Chizu Saito, Hisashi Sugimoto, Hiroaki Fushiki, Makoto Ito, Akihiro Nomura, Tomokazu Yoshizaki JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e57054. CrossRef
Response to Letter to the Editor re: “Artificial Intelligence Versus Expert Plastic Surgeon: Comparative Study Shows ChatGPT ‘Wins' Rhinoplasty Consultations: Should We Be Worried? [1]” by Durairaj et al Kay Durairaj, Omer Baker Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine.2024; 26(3): 276. CrossRef
Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping review Xiaojun Xu, Yixiao Chen, Jing Miao Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 6. CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT Across Different Versions in Medical Licensing Examinations Worldwide: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Mingxin Liu, Tsuyoshi Okuhara, XinYi Chang, Ritsuko Shirabe, Yuriko Nishiie, Hiroko Okada, Takahiro Kiuchi Journal of Medical Internet Research.2024; 26: e60807. CrossRef
Comparative accuracy of ChatGPT-4, Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini in the Italian entrance test for healthcare sciences degrees: a cross-sectional study Giacomo Rossettini, Lia Rodeghiero, Federica Corradi, Chad Cook, Paolo Pillastrini, Andrea Turolla, Greta Castellini, Stefania Chiappinotto, Silvia Gianola, Alvisa Palese BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating the competency of ChatGPT in MRCP Part 1 and a systematic literature review of its capabilities in postgraduate medical assessments Oliver Vij, Henry Calver, Nikki Myall, Mrinalini Dey, Koushan Kouranloo, Thiago P. Fernandes PLOS ONE.2024; 19(7): e0307372. CrossRef
Large Language Models in Pediatric Education: Current Uses and Future Potential Srinivasan Suresh, Sanghamitra M. Misra Pediatrics.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of the Performance of ChatGPT, Claude and Bard in Support of Myopia Prevention and Control Yan Wang, Lihua Liang, Ran Li, Yihua Wang, Changfu Hao Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare.2024; Volume 17: 3917. CrossRef
Evaluating Large Language Models in Dental Anesthesiology: A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT-4, Claude 3 Opus, and Gemini 1.0 on the Japanese Dental Society of Anesthesiology Board Certification Exam Misaki Fujimoto, Hidetaka Kuroda, Tomomi Katayama, Atsuki Yamaguchi, Norika Katagiri, Keita Kagawa, Shota Tsukimoto, Akito Nakano, Uno Imaizumi, Aiji Sato-Boku, Naotaka Kishimoto, Tomoki Itamiya, Kanta Kido, Takuro Sanuki Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Dermatological Knowledge and Image Analysis Performance of Large Language Models Based on Specialty Certificate Examination in Dermatology Ka Siu Fan, Ka Hay Fan Dermato.2024; 4(4): 124. CrossRef
ChatGPT and Other Large Language Models in Medical Education — Scoping Literature Review Alexandra Aster, Matthias Carl Laupichler, Tamina Rockwell-Kollmann, Gilda Masala, Ebru Bala, Tobias Raupach Medical Science Educator.2024; 35(1): 555. CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT and Bard on the medical licensing examinations varies across different cultures: a comparison study Yikai Chen, Xiujie Huang, Fangjie Yang, Haiming Lin, Haoyu Lin, Zhuoqun Zheng, Qifeng Liang, Jinhai Zhang, Xinxin Li BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Temporal Relationship Between Internet Search Volumes for Diarrhea Synonyms Using ChatGPT and Emergency Department Visits for Diarrhea-Related Symptoms in South Korea (Preprint) Jinsoo Kim, Ansun Jeong, Juseong Jin, Sangjun Lee, Do Kyoon Yoon, Soyeoun Kim Journal of Medical Internet Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Information amount, accuracy, and relevance of generative artificial intelligence platforms’ answers regarding learning objectives of medical arthropodology evaluated in English and Korean queries in December 2023: a descriptive study Hyunju Lee, Soobin Park Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 39. CrossRef
Background ChatGPT is a large language model (LLM) based on artificial intelligence (AI) capable of responding in multiple languages and generating nuanced and highly complex responses. While ChatGPT holds promising applications in medical education, its limitations and potential risks cannot be ignored.
Methods A scoping review was conducted for English articles discussing ChatGPT in the context of medical education published after 2022. A literature search was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases, and information was extracted from the relevant studies that were ultimately included.
Results ChatGPT exhibits various potential applications in medical education, such as providing personalized learning plans and materials, creating clinical practice simulation scenarios, and assisting in writing articles. However, challenges associated with academic integrity, data accuracy, and potential harm to learning were also highlighted in the literature. The paper emphasizes certain recommendations for using ChatGPT, including the establishment of guidelines. Based on the review, 3 key research areas were proposed: cultivating the ability of medical students to use ChatGPT correctly, integrating ChatGPT into teaching activities and processes, and proposing standards for the use of AI by medical students.
Conclusion ChatGPT has the potential to transform medical education, but careful consideration is required for its full integration. To harness the full potential of ChatGPT in medical education, attention should not only be given to the capabilities of AI but also to its impact on students and teachers.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
AI-assisted patient education: Challenges and solutions in pediatric kidney transplantation MZ Ihsan, Dony Apriatama, Pithriani, Riza Amalia Patient Education and Counseling.2025; 131: 108575. CrossRef
Exploring predictors of AI chatbot usage intensity among students: Within- and between-person relationships based on the technology acceptance model Anne-Kathrin Kleine, Insa Schaffernak, Eva Lermer Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans.2025; 3: 100113. CrossRef
AI-powered standardised patients: evaluating ChatGPT-4o’s impact on clinical case management in intern physicians Selcen Öncü, Fulya Torun, Hilal Hatice Ülkü BMC Medical Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
UsmleGPT: An AI application for developing MCQs via multi-agent system Zhehan Jiang, Shicong Feng Software Impacts.2025; 23: 100742. CrossRef
ChatGPT’s Performance on Portuguese Medical Examination Questions: Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT-3.5 Turbo and ChatGPT-4o Mini Filipe Prazeres JMIR Medical Education.2025; 11: e65108. CrossRef
Transforming medical education: leveraging large language models to enhance PBL—a proof-of-concept study Shoukat Ali Arain, Shahid Akhtar Akhund, Muhammad Abrar Barakzai, Sultan Ayoub Meo Advances in Physiology Education.2025; 49(2): 398. CrossRef
Integrating artificial intelligence into pre-clinical medical education: challenges, opportunities, and recommendations Birgit Pohn, Lars Mehnen, Sebastian Fitzek, Kyung-Eun (Anna) Choi, Ralf J. Braun, Sepideh Hatamikia Frontiers in Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating the Accuracy and Reliability of Large Language Models (ChatGPT, Claude, DeepSeek, Gemini, Grok, and Le Chat) in Answering Item-Analyzed Multiple-Choice Questions on Blood Physiology Mayank Agarwal, Priyanka Sharma, Pinaki Wani Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial intelligence-assisted academic writing: recommendations for ethical use Adam Cheng, Aaron Calhoun, Gabriel Reedy Advances in Simulation.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
University Educators Perspectives on ChatGPT: A Technology Acceptance Model-Based Study Muna Barakat, Nesreen A. Salim, Malik Sallam Open Praxis.2025; 17(1): 129. CrossRef
Knowledge and use, perceptions of benefits and limitations of artificial intelligence chatbots among Italian physiotherapy students: a cross-sectional national study Fabio Tortella, Alvisa Palese, Andrea Turolla, Greta Castellini, Paolo Pillastrini, Maria Gabriella Landuzzi, Chad Cook, Giovanni Galeoto, Giuseppe Giovannico, Lia Rodeghiero, Silvia Gianola, Giacomo Rossettini BMC Medical Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Digital and Intelligence Education in Medicine: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis Using CiteSpace and VOSviewer Bing Xiang Yang, FuLing Zhou, Nan Bai, Sichen Zhou, Chunyan Luo, Qing Wang, Arkers Kwan Ching Wong, Frances Lin Frontiers of Digital Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Prompts, privacy, and personalized learning: integrating AI into nursing education—a qualitative study Mingyan Shen, Yanping Shen, Fangchi Liu, Jiawen Jin BMC Nursing.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Chatbots in neurology and neuroscience: Interactions with students, patients and neurologists Stefano Sandrone Brain Disorders.2024; 15: 100145. CrossRef
ChatGPT in education: unveiling frontiers and future directions through systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis Buddhini Amarathunga Asian Education and Development Studies.2024; 13(5): 412. CrossRef
Evaluating the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 on the Taiwan plastic surgery board examination Ching-Hua Hsieh, Hsiao-Yun Hsieh, Hui-Ping Lin Heliyon.2024; 10(14): e34851. CrossRef
Preparing for Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) in Health Professions Education: AMEE Guide No. 172 Ken Masters, Anne Herrmann-Werner, Teresa Festl-Wietek, David Taylor Medical Teacher.2024; 46(10): 1258. CrossRef
A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT and Medical Faculty Graduates in Medical Specialization Exams: Uncovering the Potential of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education Gülcan Gencer, Kerem Gencer Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Research ethics and issues regarding the use of ChatGPT-like artificial intelligence platforms by authors and reviewers: a narrative review Sang-Jun Kim Science Editing.2024; 11(2): 96. CrossRef
Innovation Off the Bat: Bridging the ChatGPT Gap in Digital Competence among English as a Foreign Language Teachers Gulsara Urazbayeva, Raisa Kussainova, Aikumis Aibergen, Assel Kaliyeva, Gulnur Kantayeva Education Sciences.2024; 14(9): 946. CrossRef
Exploring the perceptions of Chinese pre-service teachers on the integration of generative AI in English language teaching: Benefits, challenges, and educational implications Ji Young Chung, Seung-Hoon Jeong Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies.2024; 14(4): e202457. CrossRef
Unveiling the bright side and dark side of AI-based ChatGPT : a bibliographic and thematic approach Chandan Kumar Tiwari, Mohd. Abass Bhat, Abel Dula Wedajo, Shagufta Tariq Khan Journal of Decision Systems.2024; : 1. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education and Mentoring in Rehabilitation Medicine Julie K. Silver, Mustafa Reha Dodurgali, Nara Gavini American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation.2024; 103(11): 1039. CrossRef
The Potential of Artificial Intelligence Tools for Reducing Uncertainty in Medicine and Directions for Medical Education Sauliha Rabia Alli, Soaad Qahhār Hossain, Sunit Das, Ross Upshur JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e51446. CrossRef
A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Research on Applying Generative Artificial Intelligence in Education Xin Zhang, Peng Zhang, Yuan Shen, Min Liu, Qiong Wang, Dragan Gašević, Yizhou Fan Frontiers of Digital Education.2024; 1(3): 223. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence in medical problem-based learning: opportunities and challenges Yaoxing Chen, Hong Qi, Yu Qiu, Juan Li, Liang Zhu, Xiaoling Gao, Hao Wang, Gan Jiang Global Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
This study aims to explore ChatGPT’s (GPT-3.5 version) functionalities, including reinforcement learning, diverse applications, and limitations. ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot powered by OpenAI’s Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) model. The chatbot’s applications span education, programming, content generation, and more, demonstrating its versatility. ChatGPT can improve education by creating assignments and offering personalized feedback, as shown by its notable performance in medical exams and the United States Medical Licensing Exam. However, concerns include plagiarism, reliability, and educational disparities. It aids in various research tasks, from design to writing, and has shown proficiency in summarizing and suggesting titles. Its use in scientific writing and language translation is promising, but professional oversight is needed for accuracy and originality. It assists in programming tasks like writing code, debugging, and guiding installation and updates. It offers diverse applications, from cheering up individuals to generating creative content like essays, news articles, and business plans. Unlike search engines, ChatGPT provides interactive, generative responses and understands context, making it more akin to human conversation, in contrast to conventional search engines’ keyword-based, non-interactive nature. ChatGPT has limitations, such as potential bias, dependence on outdated data, and revenue generation challenges. Nonetheless, ChatGPT is considered to be a transformative AI tool poised to redefine the future of generative technology. In conclusion, advancements in AI, such as ChatGPT, are altering how knowledge is acquired and applied, marking a shift from search engines to creativity engines. This transformation highlights the increasing importance of AI literacy and the ability to effectively utilize AI in various domains of life.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
The Development and Validation of an Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Dependence Scale Xing Zhang, Mingyue Yin, Mingyang Zhang, Zhaoqian Li, Hansen Li Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking.2025; 28(2): 126. CrossRef
Readability, quality and accuracy of generative artificial intelligence chatbots for commonly asked questions about labor epidurals: a comparison of ChatGPT and Bard D. Lee, M. Brown, J. Hammond, M. Zakowski International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia.2025; 61: 104317. CrossRef
ChatGPT-4 Performance on German Continuing Medical Education—Friend or Foe (Trick or Treat)? Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial Christian Burisch, Abhav Bellary, Frank Breuckmann, Jan Ehlers, Serge C Thal, Timur Sellmann, Daniel Gödde JMIR Research Protocols.2025; 14: e63887. CrossRef
The effect of incorporating large language models into the teaching on critical thinking disposition: An “AI + Constructivism Learning Theory” attempt Peng Wang, Kexin Yin, Mingzhu Zhang, Yuanxin Zheng, Tong Zhang, Yanjun Kang, Xun Feng Education and Information Technologies.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
The Impact of Adaptive Learning Technologies, Personalized Feedback, and Interactive AI Tools on Student Engagement: The Moderating Role of Digital Literacy Husam Yaseen, Abdelaziz Saleh Mohammad, Najwa Ashal, Hesham Abusaimeh, Ahmad Ali, Abdel-Aziz Ahmad Sharabati Sustainability.2025; 17(3): 1133. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence in Nursing: New Opportunities and Challenges Estel·la Ramírez‐Baraldes, Daniel García‐Gutiérrez, Cristina García‐Salido European Journal of Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Can ChatGPT be used as a scientific source of information on tooth extraction? Shiori Yamamoto, Masakazu Hamada, Kyoko Nishiyama, Ayako Motoki, Yusei Fujita, Narikazu Uzawa Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Medicine, and Pathology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Exploring artificial intelligence (AI) Chatbot usage behaviors and their association with mental health outcomes in Chinese university students Xing Zhang, Zhaoqian Li, Mingyang Zhang, Mingyue Yin, Zhangyu Yang, Dong Gao, Hansen Li Journal of Affective Disorders.2025; 380: 394. CrossRef
The analysis of optimization in music aesthetic education under artificial intelligence Yixuan Peng Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Computer Science Education: A Systematic Review with a Focus on Database Instruction Alkmini Gaitantzi, Ioannis Kazanidis Applied Sciences.2025; 15(7): 3960. CrossRef
A Bibliometric Exposition and Review on Leveraging LLMs for Programming Education Joanah Pwanedo Amos, Oluwatosin Ahmed Amodu, Raja Azlina Raja Mahmood, Akanbi Bolakale Abdulqudus, Anies Faziehan Zakaria, Abimbola Rhoda Iyanda, Umar Ali Bukar, Zurina Mohd Hanapi IEEE Access.2025; 13: 58364. CrossRef
Can ChatGPT be trusted as a resource for a scholarly article on treatment planning implant-supported prostheses? Steven J. Sadowsky The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Use of machine translation in foreign language education Blanka Klimova Cogent Arts & Humanities.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of triage performance among DRP tool, ChatGPT, and outpatient rehabilitation doctors Yucong Zou, Ruixue Ye, Yan Gao, Jing Zhou, Yawei Li, Wenshi Chen, Fubing Zha, Yulong Wang Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping review Xiaojun Xu, Yixiao Chen, Jing Miao Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 6. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence: Fundamentals and Breakthrough Applications in Epilepsy Wesley Kerr, Sandra Acosta, Patrick Kwan, Gregory Worrell, Mohamad A. Mikati Epilepsy Currents.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
A Developed Graphical User Interface-Based on Different Generative Pre-trained Transformers Models Ekrem Küçük, İpek Balıkçı Çiçek, Zeynep Küçükakçalı, Cihan Yetiş, Cemil Çolak ODÜ Tıp Dergisi.2024; 11(1): 18. CrossRef
Art or Artifact: Evaluating the Accuracy, Appeal, and Educational Value of AI-Generated Imagery in DALL·E 3 for Illustrating Congenital Heart Diseases Mohamad-Hani Temsah, Abdullah N. Alhuzaimi, Mohammed Almansour, Fadi Aljamaan, Khalid Alhasan, Munirah A. Batarfi, Ibraheem Altamimi, Amani Alharbi, Adel Abdulaziz Alsuhaibani, Leena Alwakeel, Abdulrahman Abdulkhaliq Alzahrani, Khaled B. Alsulaim, Amr Jam Journal of Medical Systems.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Authentic assessment in medical education: exploring AI integration and student-as-partners collaboration Syeda Sadia Fatima, Nabeel Ashfaque Sheikh, Athar Osama Postgraduate Medical Journal.2024; 100(1190): 959. CrossRef
Comparative performance analysis of large language models: ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4 and Google Gemini in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis Linjian Tong, Chaoyang Zhang, Rui Liu, Jia Yang, Zhiming Sun Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Can AI-Generated Clinical Vignettes in Japanese Be Used Medically and Linguistically? Yasutaka Yanagita, Daiki Yokokawa, Shun Uchida, Yu Li, Takanori Uehara, Masatomi Ikusaka Journal of General Internal Medicine.2024; 39(16): 3282. CrossRef
ChatGPT vs. sleep disorder specialist responses to common sleep queries: Ratings by experts and laypeople Jiyoung Kim, Seo-Young Lee, Jee Hyun Kim, Dong-Hyeon Shin, Eun Hye Oh, Jin A Kim, Jae Wook Cho Sleep Health.2024; 10(6): 665. CrossRef
Technology integration into Chinese as a foreign language learning in higher education: An integrated bibliometric analysis and systematic review (2000–2024) Binze Xu Language Teaching Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The Transformative Power of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Achieving the Sustainable Development Goal of Quality Education Prema Nedungadi, Kai-Yu Tang, Raghu Raman Sustainability.2024; 16(22): 9779. CrossRef
Is AI the new course creator Sheri Conklin, Tom Dorgan, Daisyane Barreto Discover Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Emergency Medicine Assistants in the Field of Toxicology, Comparison of ChatGPT-3.5 and GEMINI Artificial Intelligence Systems Hatice Aslı Bedel, Cihan Bedel, Fatih Selvi, Ökkeş Zortuk, Yusuf Karanci Acta medica Lituanica.2024; 31(2): 294. CrossRef
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become central in many research fields, particularly medicine. They offer the highest level of evidence in evidence-based medicine and support the development and revision of clinical practice guidelines, which offer recommendations for clinicians caring for patients with specific diseases and conditions. This review summarizes the concepts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and provides guidance on reviewing and assessing such papers. A systematic review refers to a review of a research question that uses explicit and systematic methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research. In contrast, a meta-analysis is a quantitative statistical analysis that combines individual results on the same research question to estimate the common or mean effect. Conducting a meta-analysis involves defining a research topic, selecting a study design, searching literature in electronic databases, selecting relevant studies, and conducting the analysis. One can assess the findings of a meta-analysis by interpreting a forest plot and a funnel plot and by examining heterogeneity. When reviewing systematic reviews and meta-analyses, several essential points must be considered, including the originality and significance of the work, the comprehensiveness of the database search, the selection of studies based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, subgroup analyses by various factors, and the interpretation of the results based on the levels of evidence. This review will provide readers with helpful guidance to help them read, understand, and evaluate these articles.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
The effectiveness and usability of online, group-based interventions for people with severe obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis Madison Milne-Ives, Lorna Burns, Dawn Swancutt, Raff Calitri, Ananya Ananthakrishnan, Helene Davis, Jonathan Pinkney, Mark Tarrant, Edward Meinert International Journal of Obesity.2025; 49(4): 564. CrossRef
Testing the distinction between sadism and psychopathy: A metanalysis Bruno Bonfá-Araujo, Gisele Magarotto Machado, Ariela Raissa Lima-Costa, Fernanda Otoni, Mahnoor Nadeem, Peter K. Jonason Personality and Individual Differences.2025; 235: 112973. CrossRef
Impact of peripheral immune cells in experimental neonatal hypoxia-ischemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis Ricardo Ribeiro Nunes, Luz Elena Durán-Carabali, Nícolas Heller Ribeiro, Dienifer Hermann Sirena, Isadora D’Ávila Tassinari, Carlos Alexandre Netto, Ana Helena Paz, Luciano Stürmer de Fraga International Immunopharmacology.2025; 145: 113682. CrossRef
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty amongst older hospital inpatients in low- and middle-income countries Sean Lawlor Davidson, Jim Lee, Luke Emmence, Emily Bickerstaff, George Rayers, Elizabeth Davidson, Jenny Richardson, Heather Anderson, Richard Walker, Catherine Dotchin Age and Ageing.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Effect of Motivational Interviewing and Exercise on Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Olayinka Akinrolie, Uchechukwu B. Abioke, Francis O. Kolawole, Nicole Askin, Ebuka M. Anieto, Serena A. Itua, Oluwatoyin G. Akin, Blessing Eromosele, Opeyemi A. Idowu, Henrietta O. Fawole Musculoskeletal Care.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Smoking and Risk of Fatty Liver Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies Moonhyung Lee, Seung-Kwon Myung, Sang Hee Lee, Yoosoo Chang Gastroenterology Insights.2025; 16(1): 1. CrossRef
The Influence of Study Quality, Age, and Geographic Factors on PCOS Prevalence—A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Mina Amiri, Sana Hatoum, Richard P Buyalos, Ali Sheidaei, Ricardo Azziz The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Relationship Between Bullshit, Cognitive Skills, and Belief Systems: A Meta‐Analytic Review Geraldy Sepúlveda‐Páez, Marcelo Leiva‐Bianchi, Rodrigo Ferrer‐Urbina, Javier Escudero‐Pastén, Fabiola Salas Applied Cognitive Psychology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Adjuvant chemotherapy in localized, resectable extremity and truncal soft tissue sarcoma and survival outcomes – A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials Megan H. Goh, Marcos R. Gonzalez, Hillary M. Heiling, Emanuele Mazzola, Joseph J. Connolly, Edwin Choy, Gregory M. Cote, Dimitrios Spentzos, Santiago A. Lozano‐Calderon Cancer.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Relationship Between Sleep Disturbances and In Vitro Fertilization Outcomes in Infertile Women: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Farangis Habibi, Roya Nikbakht, Shayesteh Jahanfar, Mohammad Ahmadi, Maryam Eslami, Marzieh Azizi, Zohreh Shahhosseini Brain and Behavior.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Intimate partner violence among women of reproductive age during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis Alemayehu Sayih Belay, Gizachew Yilak, Aychew Kassie, Legese Fekede Abza, Ambaw Abebaw Emrie, Mulat Ayele, Befkad Derese Tilahun, Eyob Shitie Lake BMJ Public Health.2025; 3(1): e001161. CrossRef
Meta-analysis of Reliability and Validity of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS) Rossella Bottaro, Mark D. Griffiths, Palmira Faraci International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficacy of PCSK9 inhibitors on pediatric patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Alesia Prillya Mauna, Joshua Eldad Frederich Lasanudin Cardiology Plus.2025; 10(1): 61. CrossRef
Efficacy of integrated physical and psychological interventions on PTSD among forcibly displaced persons: a systematic review and meta-analysis Aditi Chaudhari, Apoorwa Chaudhari, Sandra O’Frans, Rohan Jayasuriya, Alvin Kuowei Tay Psychological Medicine.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Home-based shared book reading and developmental outcomes in young children: a systematic review with meta-analyses Claire Galea, Alana Jones, Katherine Ko, Andrea Salins, Serje Robidoux, Clayton Noble, Genevieve McArthur Frontiers in Language Sciences.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficacy and Safety of Quantum Molecular Resonance Electrotherapy in Dry Eye Disease: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis Antonio Ballesteros-Sánchez, Carlos Rocha-de-Lossada, José-María Sánchez-González, Giovanni Roberto Tedesco, Davide Borroni Ophthalmology and Therapy.2025; 14(5): 1111. CrossRef
The impact of toe-clipping on animal welfare in amphibians: A systematic review Miriam A. Zemanova, Raquel Lázaro Martín, Cathalijn H.C. Leenaars Global Ecology and Conservation.2025; 59: e03582. CrossRef
Differences in Sprinting and Jumping Performance Between Maturity Status Groups in Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis James Baker, Paul Read, Philip Graham-Smith, Marco Cardinale, Thomas W. Jones Sports Medicine.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Generative artificial intelligence in special education: A systematic review through the lens of the mediated-action model Meiqin Wang, Ahmed Tlili, Mohamed Koutheair Khribi, Chung Kwan Lo, Ronghuai Huang Information Development.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
The Role of BIM in Managing Risks in Sustainability of Bridge Projects: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis Dema Munef Ahmad, László Gáspár, Zsolt Bencze, Rana Ahmad Maya Sustainability.2024; 16(3): 1242. CrossRef
The association between long noncoding RNA ABHD11-AS1 and malignancy prognosis: a meta-analysis Guangyao Lin, Tao Ye, Jing Wang BMC Cancer.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The impact of indoor carbon dioxide exposure on human brain activity: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on studies utilizing electroencephalogram signals Nan Zhang, Chao Liu, Caixia Hou, Wenhao Wang, Qianhui Yuan, Weijun Gao Building and Environment.2024; 259: 111687. CrossRef
Efficacy of mechanical debridement with adjunct antimicrobial photodynamic therapy against peri-implant subgingival oral yeasts colonization: A systematic review and meta-analysis Dena Ali, Jenna Alsalman Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy.2024; 50: 104399. CrossRef
Non-invasive brain stimulation enhances motor and cognitive performances during dual tasks in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis Hajun Lee, Beom Jin Choi, Nyeonju Kang Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
LIMITED EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT CHATGPT MAY HAVE ACCURATE RESPONSES IN MEDICAL AND DENTAL RESEARCH IMAN ABD-ELWAHAB RADI, MARIAM TAHER ABDELFATTAH ABOUMOSALLAM Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice.2025; : 102090. CrossRef
Seeing the forest for the trees and the changing seasons in the vast land of scholarly publishing Soo Jung Shin Science Editing.2024; 11(1): 81. CrossRef
The emergence of generative artificial intelligence platforms in 2023, journal metrics, appreciation to reviewers and volunteers, and obituary Sun Huh Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 9. CrossRef
Exploring the impact of ChatGPT: conversational AI in education Anissa M. Bettayeb, Manar Abu Talib, Al Zahraa Sobhe Altayasinah, Fatima Dakalbab Frontiers in Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT in medicine: A cross-disciplinary systematic review of ChatGPT’s (artificial intelligence) role in research, clinical practice, education, and patient interaction Afia Fatima, Muhammad Ashir Shafique, Khadija Alam, Tagwa Kalool Fadlalla Ahmed, Muhammad Saqlain Mustafa Medicine.2024; 103(32): e39250. CrossRef
Capturing pharmacists’ perspectives on the value, risks, and applications of ChatGPT in pharmacy practice: A qualitative study Ammar Abdulrahman Jairoun, Sabaa Saleh Al-Hemyari, Moyad Shahwan, Ghala Rashid Alnuaimi, Nihal Ibrahim, Ammar Ali Saleh Jaber Exploratory Research in Clinical and Social Pharmacy.2024; 16: 100518. CrossRef
Assessing the Role of the Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) in Alzheimer’s Disease Management: Comparative Study of Neurologist- and Artificial Intelligence–Generated Responses Jiaqi Zeng, Xiaoyi Zou, Shirong Li, Yao Tang, Sisi Teng, Huanhuan Li, Changyu Wang, Yuxuan Wu, Luyao Zhang, Yunheng Zhong, Jialin Liu, Siru Liu Journal of Medical Internet Research.2024; 26: e51095. CrossRef
ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns Malik Sallam Healthcare.2023; 11(6): 887. CrossRef
Exploring Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance, Uptake, and Hesitancy in the Pediatric Population: A Study of Parents and Caregivers in Saudi Arabia during the Initial Vaccination Phase Abdullah N. Alhuzaimi, Abdullah A. Alrasheed, Ayman Al-Eyadhy, Fadi Aljamaan, Khalid Alhasan, Mohammed A. Batais, Amr Jamal, Fatimah S. Alshahrani, Shuliweeh Alenezi, Ali Alhaboob, Fahad AlZamil, Yaser Y. Bashumeel, Ahmad M. Banaeem, Abdulrahman Aldawood, Healthcare.2023; 11(7): 972. CrossRef
ChatGPT and large language model (LLM) chatbots: The current state of acceptability and a proposal for guidelines on utilization in academic medicine Jin K. Kim, Michael Chua, Mandy Rickard, Armando Lorenzo Journal of Pediatric Urology.2023; 19(5): 598. CrossRef
The Potential Usefulness of ChatGPT in Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology Jyoti Mago, Manoj Sharma Cureus.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Decoding ChatGPT: A taxonomy of existing research, current challenges, and possible future directions Shahab Saquib Sohail, Faiza Farhat, Yassine Himeur, Mohammad Nadeem, Dag Øivind Madsen, Yashbir Singh, Shadi Atalla, Wathiq Mansoor Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences.2023; 35(8): 101675. CrossRef
Universal skepticism of ChatGPT: a review of early literature on chat generative pre-trained transformer Casey Watters, Michal K. Lemanski Frontiers in Big Data.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions received the Journal Impact Factor, 4.4 for the first time on June 28, 2023 Sun Huh Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 21. CrossRef
ChatGPT in action: Harnessing artificial intelligence potential and addressing ethical challenges in medicine, education, and scientific research Madhan Jeyaraman, Swaminathan Ramasubramanian, Sangeetha Balaji, Naveen Jeyaraman, Arulkumar Nallakumarasamy, Shilpa Sharma World Journal of Methodology.2023; 13(4): 170. CrossRef
ChatGPT in pharmacy practice: a cross-sectional exploration of Jordanian pharmacists' perception, practice, and concerns
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT: unlocking the potential of Artifical Intelligence in COVID-19 monitoring and prediction Alberto G. GERLI, Joan B. SORIANO, Gianfranco ALICANDRO, Michele SALVAGNO, Fabio TACCONE, Stefano CENTANNI, Carlo LA VECCHIA Panminerva Medica.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
A systematic review and meta-analysis on ChatGPT and its utilization in medical and dental research Hiroj Bagde, Ashwini Dhopte, Mohammad Khursheed Alam, Rehana Basri Heliyon.2023; 9(12): e23050. CrossRef
ChatGPT: A brief narrative review Bulbul Gupta, Tabish Mufti, Shahab Saquib Sohail, Dag Øivind Madsen Cogent Business & Management.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose This study aimed to assess the performance of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) as a study tool in solving biostatistical problems and to identify any potential drawbacks that might arise from using ChatGPT in medical education, particularly in solving practical biostatistical problems.
Methods ChatGPT was tested to evaluate its ability to solve biostatistical problems from the Handbook of Medical Statistics by Peacock and Peacock in this descriptive study. Tables from the problems were transformed into textual questions. Ten biostatistical problems were randomly chosen and used as text-based input for conversation with ChatGPT (versions 3.5 and 4).
Results GPT-3.5 solved 5 practical problems in the first attempt, related to categorical data, cross-sectional study, measuring reliability, probability properties, and the t-test. GPT-3.5 failed to provide correct answers regarding analysis of variance, the chi-square test, and sample size within 3 attempts. GPT-4 also solved a task related to the confidence interval in the first attempt and solved all questions within 3 attempts, with precise guidance and monitoring.
Conclusion The assessment of both versions of ChatGPT performance in 10 biostatistical problems revealed that GPT-3.5 and 4’s performance was below average, with correct response rates of 5 and 6 out of 10 on the first attempt. GPT-4 succeeded in providing all correct answers within 3 attempts. These findings indicate that students must be aware that this tool, even when providing and calculating different statistical analyses, can be wrong, and they should be aware of ChatGPT’s limitations and be careful when incorporating this model into medical education.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
From statistics to deep learning: Using large language models in psychiatric research Yining Hua, Andrew Beam, Lori B. Chibnik, John Torous International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Assessing the Current Limitations of Large Language Models in Advancing Health Care Education JaeYong Kim, Bathri Narayan Vajravelu JMIR Formative Research.2025; 9: e51319. CrossRef
ChatGPT for Univariate Statistics: Validation of AI-Assisted Data Analysis in Healthcare Research Michael R Ruta, Tony Gaidici, Chase Irwin, Jonathan Lifshitz Journal of Medical Internet Research.2025; 27: e63550. CrossRef
Can Generative AI and ChatGPT Outperform Humans on Cognitive-Demanding Problem-Solving Tasks in Science? Xiaoming Zhai, Matthew Nyaaba, Wenchao Ma Science & Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping review Xiaojun Xu, Yixiao Chen, Jing Miao Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 6. CrossRef
Comparing the Performance of ChatGPT-4 and Medical Students on MCQs at Varied Levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy Ambadasu Bharatha, Nkemcho Ojeh, Ahbab Mohammad Fazle Rabbi, Michael Campbell, Kandamaran Krishnamurthy, Rhaheem Layne-Yarde, Alok Kumar, Dale Springer, Kenneth Connell, Md Anwarul Majumder Advances in Medical Education and Practice.2024; Volume 15: 393. CrossRef
Revolutionizing Cardiology With Words: Unveiling the Impact of Large Language Models in Medical Science Writing Abhijit Bhattaru, Naveena Yanamala, Partho P. Sengupta Canadian Journal of Cardiology.2024; 40(10): 1950. CrossRef
ChatGPT in medicine: prospects and challenges: a review article Songtao Tan, Xin Xin, Di Wu International Journal of Surgery.2024; 110(6): 3701. CrossRef
In-depth analysis of ChatGPT’s performance based on specific signaling words and phrases in the question stem of 2377 USMLE step 1 style questions Leonard Knoedler, Samuel Knoedler, Cosima C. Hoch, Lukas Prantl, Konstantin Frank, Laura Soiderer, Sebastian Cotofana, Amir H. Dorafshar, Thilo Schenck, Felix Vollbach, Giuseppe Sofo, Michael Alfertshofer Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Evaluating the quality of responses generated by ChatGPT Danimir Mandić, Gordana Miščević, Ljiljana Bujišić Metodicka praksa.2024; 27(1): 5. CrossRef
A Comparative Evaluation of Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) and ChatGPT-4 in Statistical Analyses Al Imran Shahrul, Alizae Marny F Syed Mohamed Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT and Other Large Language Models in Medical Education — Scoping Literature Review Alexandra Aster, Matthias Carl Laupichler, Tamina Rockwell-Kollmann, Gilda Masala, Ebru Bala, Tobias Raupach Medical Science Educator.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Exploring the potential of large language models for integration into an academic statistical consulting service–the EXPOLS study protocol Urs Alexander Fichtner, Jochen Knaus, Erika Graf, Georg Koch, Jörg Sahlmann, Dominikus Stelzer, Martin Wolkewitz, Harald Binder, Susanne Weber, Bekalu Tadesse Moges PLOS ONE.2024; 19(12): e0308375. CrossRef
Purpose This study aimed to analyze patterns of using ChatGPT before and after group activities and to explore medical students’ perceptions of ChatGPT as a feedback tool in the classroom.
Methods The study included 99 2nd-year pre-medical students who participated in a “Leadership and Communication” course from March to June 2023. Students engaged in both individual and group activities related to negotiation strategies. ChatGPT was used to provide feedback on their solutions. A survey was administered to assess students’ perceptions of ChatGPT’s feedback, its use in the classroom, and the strengths and challenges of ChatGPT from May 17 to 19, 2023.
Results The students responded by indicating that ChatGPT’s feedback was helpful, and revised and resubmitted their group answers in various ways after receiving feedback. The majority of respondents expressed agreement with the use of ChatGPT during class. The most common response concerning the appropriate context of using ChatGPT’s feedback was “after the first round of discussion, for revisions.” There was a significant difference in satisfaction with ChatGPT’s feedback, including correctness, usefulness, and ethics, depending on whether or not ChatGPT was used during class, but there was no significant difference according to gender or whether students had previous experience with ChatGPT. The strongest advantages were “providing answers to questions” and “summarizing information,” and the worst disadvantage was “producing information without supporting evidence.”
Conclusion The students were aware of the advantages and disadvantages of ChatGPT, and they had a positive attitude toward using ChatGPT in the classroom.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Higher education students’ perceptions of ChatGPT: A global study of early reactions Dejan Ravšelj, Damijana Keržič, Nina Tomaževič, Lan Umek, Nejc Brezovar, Noorminshah A. Iahad, Ali Abdulla Abdulla, Anait Akopyan, Magdalena Waleska Aldana Segura, Jehan AlHumaid, Mohamed Farouk Allam, Maria Alló, Raphael Papa Kweku Andoh, Octavian Andron PLOS ONE.2025; 20(2): e0315011. CrossRef
Generative AI in Otolaryngology Residency Personal Statement Writing: A Mixed‐Methods Analysis Jacob G. J. Wihlidal, Nikolaus E. Wolter, Evan J. Propst, Vincent Lin, Michael Au, Shaunak Amin, Jennifer M. Siu The Laryngoscope.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Applications of Artificial Intelligence for Nonpsychomotor Skills Training in Health Professions Education: A Scoping Review Kenya A. Costa-Dookhan, Zachary Adirim, Marta Maslej, Kayle Donner, Terri Rodak, Sophie Soklaridis, Sanjeev Sockalingam, Anupam Thakur Academic Medicine.2025; 100(5): 635. CrossRef
Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping review Xiaojun Xu, Yixiao Chen, Jing Miao Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 6. CrossRef
Embracing ChatGPT for Medical Education: Exploring Its Impact on Doctors and Medical Students Yijun Wu, Yue Zheng, Baijie Feng, Yuqi Yang, Kai Kang, Ailin Zhao JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e52483. CrossRef
Integration of ChatGPT Into a Course for Medical Students: Explorative Study on Teaching Scenarios, Students’ Perception, and Applications Anita V Thomae, Claudia M Witt, Jürgen Barth JMIR Medical Education.2024; 10: e50545. CrossRef
A cross sectional investigation of ChatGPT-like large language models application among medical students in China Guixia Pan, Jing Ni BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
A Pilot Study of Medical Student Opinions on Large Language Models Alan Y Xu, Vincent S Piranio, Skye Speakman, Chelsea D Rosen, Sally Lu, Chris Lamprecht, Robert E Medina, Maisha Corrielus, Ian T Griffin, Corinne E Chatham, Nicolas J Abchee, Daniel Stribling, Phuong B Huynh, Heather Harrell, Benjamin Shickel, Meghan Bre Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The intent of ChatGPT usage and its robustness in medical proficiency exams: a systematic review Tatiana Chaiban, Zeinab Nahle, Ghaith Assi, Michelle Cherfane Discover Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Feasibility of a Randomised Controlled Trial of Large Artificial Intelligence-Based Linguistic Models for Clinical Reasoning Training of Physical Therapy Students. A Pilot Study (Preprint) Raúl Ferrer Peña, Silvia Di Bonaventura, Alberto Pérez González, Alfredo Lerín Calvo JMIR Formative Research.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
ChatGPT and Clinical Training: Perception, Concerns, and Practice of Pharm-D Students Mohammed Zawiah, Fahmi Al-Ashwal, Lobna Gharaibeh, Rana Abu Farha, Karem Alzoubi, Khawla Abu Hammour, Qutaiba A Qasim, Fahd Abrah Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare.2023; Volume 16: 4099. CrossRef
Information amount, accuracy, and relevance of generative artificial intelligence platforms’ answers regarding learning objectives of medical arthropodology evaluated in English and Korean queries in December 2023: a descriptive study Hyunju Lee, Soobin Park Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 39. CrossRef
Purpose The objective of this study was to assess the performance of ChatGPT (GPT-4) on all items, including those with diagrams, in the Japanese National License Examination for Pharmacists (JNLEP) and compare it with the previous GPT-3.5 model’s performance.
Methods The 107th JNLEP, conducted in 2022, with 344 items input into the GPT-4 model, was targeted for this study. Separately, 284 items, excluding those with diagrams, were entered into the GPT-3.5 model. The answers were categorized and analyzed to determine accuracy rates based on categories, subjects, and presence or absence of diagrams. The accuracy rates were compared to the main passing criteria (overall accuracy rate ≥62.9%).
Results The overall accuracy rate for all items in the 107th JNLEP in GPT-4 was 72.5%, successfully meeting all the passing criteria. For the set of items without diagrams, the accuracy rate was 80.0%, which was significantly higher than that of the GPT-3.5 model (43.5%). The GPT-4 model demonstrated an accuracy rate of 36.1% for items that included diagrams.
Conclusion Advancements that allow GPT-4 to process images have made it possible for LLMs to answer all items in medical-related license examinations. This study’s findings confirm that ChatGPT (GPT-4) possesses sufficient knowledge to meet the passing criteria.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Performance of ChatGPT‐3.5 and ChatGPT‐4o in the Japanese National Dental Examination Osamu Uehara, Tetsuro Morikawa, Fumiya Harada, Nodoka Sugiyama, Yuko Matsuki, Daichi Hiraki, Hinako Sakurai, Takashi Kado, Koki Yoshida, Yukie Murata, Hirofumi Matsuoka, Toshiyuki Nagasawa, Yasushi Furuichi, Yoshihiro Abiko, Hiroko Miura Journal of Dental Education.2025; 89(4): 459. CrossRef
Qwen-2.5 Outperforms Other Large Language Models in the Chinese National Nursing Licensing Examination: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Comparative Study Shiben Zhu, Wanqin Hu, Zhi Yang, Jiani Yan, Fang Zhang JMIR Medical Informatics.2025; 13: e63731. CrossRef
ChatGPT (GPT-4V) Performance on the Healthcare Information Technologist Examination in Japan Kai Ishida, Eisuke Hanada Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Medication counseling for OTC drugs using customized ChatGPT-4: Comparison with ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4o Keisuke Kiyomiya, Tohru Aomori, Hisakazu Ohtani DIGITAL HEALTH.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Current Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Pharmacy Practice: A Literature Mini-review Keisuke Kiyomiya, Tohru Aomori, Hitoshi Kawazoe, Hisakazu Ohtani Iryo Yakugaku (Japanese Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences).2025; 51(4): 177. CrossRef
Potential of ChatGPT to Pass the Japanese Medical and Healthcare Professional National Licenses: A Literature Review Kai Ishida, Eisuke Hanada Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Performance of Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT)-4 and Gemini Advanced on the First-Class Radiation Protection Supervisor Examination in Japan Hiroki Goto, Yoshioki Shiraishi, Seiji Okada Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
An exploratory assessment of GPT-4o and GPT-4 performance on the Japanese National Dental Examination Masaki Morishita, Hikaru Fukuda, Shino Yamaguchi, Kosuke Muraoka, Taiji Nakamura, Masanari Hayashi, Izumi Yoshioka, Kentaro Ono, Shuji Awano The Saudi Dental Journal.2024; 36(12): 1577. CrossRef
Evaluating the Accuracy of ChatGPT in the Japanese Board-Certified Physiatrist Examination Yuki Kato, Kenta Ushida, Ryo Momosaki Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose Orthopedic manual therapy (OMT) education demonstrates significant variability between philosophies and while literature has offered a more comprehensive understanding of the contextual, patient specific, and technique factors which interact to influence outcome, most OMT training paradigms continue to emphasize the mechanical basis for OMT application. The purpose of this study was to establish consensus on modifications & adaptions to training paradigms which need to occur within OMT education to align with current evidence.
Methods A 3-round Delphi survey instrument designed to identify foundational knowledge to include and omit from OMT education was completed by 28 educators working within high level manual therapy education programs internationally. Round 1 consisted of open-ended questions to identify content in each area. Round 2 and Round 3 allowed participants to rank the themes identified in Round 1.
Results Consensus was reached on 25 content areas to include within OMT education, 1 content area to omit from OMT education, and 34 knowledge components which should be present in those providing OMT. Support was seen for education promoting understanding the complex psychological, neurophysiological, and biomechanical systems as they relate to both evaluation and treatment effect. While some concepts were more consistently supported there was significant variability in responses which is largely expected to be related to previous training.
Conclusion The results of this study indicate manual therapy educators understanding of evidence-based practice as support for all 3 tiers of evidence were represented. The results of this study should guide OMT training program development and modification.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
The Effectiveness of Spinal Manipulative Therapy in Treating Spinal Pain Does Not Depend on the Application Procedures: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis Casper Nim, Sasha L. Aspinall, Chad E. Cook, Leticia A. Corrêa, Megan Donaldson, Aron S. Downie, Steen Harsted, Simone Hansen, Hazel J. Jenkins, David McNaughton, Luana Nyirö, Stephen M. Perle, Eric J. Roseen, James J. Young, Anika Young, Gong-He Zhao, Ja Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy.2025; 55(2): 109. CrossRef
The mechanisms of manual therapy: A living review of systematic, narrative, and scoping reviews Damian L. Keter, Joel E. Bialosky, Kevin Brochetti, Carol A. Courtney, Martha Funabashi, Steve Karas, Kenneth Learman, Chad E. Cook, Claudia Sommer PLOS ONE.2025; 20(3): e0319586. CrossRef
A critical review of the role of manual therapy in the treatment of individuals with low back pain Jean-Pascal Grenier, Maria Rothmund Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy.2024; 32(5): 464. CrossRef
Development of a basic evaluation model for manual therapy learning in rehabilitation students based on the Delphi method Wang Ziyi, Zhou Supo, Marcin Białas BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Delphi Studie zur Modernisierung der Ausbildung für Orthopädische Manuelle Therapie
Patient Factors Associated With Treatment Effect of Manual Therapy: A Scoping Review Damian Keter, David Griswold, Kenneth Learman, Chad E. Cook JOSPT Open.2024; 2(2): 82. CrossRef
Integrating Person-Centered Concepts and Modern Manual Therapy Damian Keter, Nathan Hutting, Rebecca Vogsland, Chad E Cook JOSPT Open.2024; 2(1): 60. CrossRef
Modernizing patient-centered manual therapy: Findings from a Delphi study on orthopaedic manual therapy application Damian Keter, David Griswold, Kenneth Learman, Chad Cook Musculoskeletal Science and Practice.2023; 65: 102777. CrossRef
Purpose This study aimed to determine whether ChatGPT-4o, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) platform, was able to pass a simulated written European Board of Interventional Radiology (EBIR) exam and whether GPT-4o can be used to train medical students and interventional radiologists of different levels of expertise by generating exam items on interventional radiology.
Methods GPT-4o was asked to answer 370 simulated exam items of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe (CIRSE) for EBIR preparation (CIRSE Prep). Subsequently, GPT-4o was requested to generate exam items on interventional radiology topics at levels of difficulty suitable for medical students and the EBIR exam. Those generated items were answered by 4 participants, including a medical student, a resident, a consultant, and an EBIR holder. The correctly answered items were counted. One investigator checked the answers and items generated by GPT-4o for correctness and relevance. This work was done from April to July 2024.
Results GPT-4o correctly answered 248 of the 370 CIRSE Prep items (67.0%). For 50 CIRSE Prep items, the medical student answered 46.0%, the resident 42.0%, the consultant 50.0%, and the EBIR holder 74.0% correctly. All participants answered 82.0% to 92.0% of the 50 GPT-4o generated items at the student level correctly. For the 50 GPT-4o items at the EBIR level, the medical student answered 32.0%, the resident 44.0%, the consultant 48.0%, and the EBIR holder 66.0% correctly. All participants could pass the GPT-4o-generated items for the student level; while the EBIR holder could pass the GPT-4o-generated items for the EBIR level. Two items (0.3%) out of 150 generated by the GPT-4o were assessed as implausible.
Conclusion GPT-4o could pass the simulated written EBIR exam and create exam items of varying difficulty to train medical students and interventional radiologists.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Evaluating the performance of ChatGPT in patient consultation and image-based preliminary diagnosis in thyroid eye disease Yue Wang, Shuo Yang, Chengcheng Zeng, Yingwei Xie, Ya Shen, Jian Li, Xiao Huang, Ruili Wei, Yuqing Chen Frontiers in Medicine.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Solving Complex Pediatric Surgical Case Studies: A Comparative Analysis of Copilot, ChatGPT-4, and Experienced Pediatric Surgeons' Performance Richard Gnatzy, Martin Lacher, Michael Berger, Michael Boettcher, Oliver J. Deffaa, Joachim Kübler, Omid Madadi-Sanjani, Illya Martynov, Steffi Mayer, Mikko P. Pakarinen, Richard Wagner, Tomas Wester, Augusto Zani, Ophelia Aubert European Journal of Pediatric Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Preliminary assessment of large language models’ performance in answering questions on developmental dysplasia of the hip Shiwei Li, Jun Jiang, Xiaodong Yang Journal of Children's Orthopaedics.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
AI and Interventional Radiology: A Narrative Review of Reviews on Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions Andrea Lastrucci, Nicola Iosca, Yannick Wandael, Angelo Barra, Graziano Lepri, Nevio Forini, Renzo Ricci, Vittorio Miele, Daniele Giansanti Diagnostics.2025; 15(7): 893. CrossRef
Evaluating the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination Dingyuan Luo, Mengke Liu, Runyuan Yu, Yulian Liu, Wenjun Jiang, Qi Fan, Naifeng Kuang, Qiang Gao, Tao Yin, Zuncheng Zheng Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
From GPT-3.5 to GPT-4.o: A Leap in AI’s Medical Exam Performance Markus Kipp Information.2024; 15(9): 543. CrossRef
Performance of ChatGPT and Bard on the medical licensing examinations varies across different cultures: a comparison study Yikai Chen, Xiujie Huang, Fangjie Yang, Haiming Lin, Haoyu Lin, Zhuoqun Zheng, Qifeng Liang, Jinhai Zhang, Xinxin Li BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose This study investigated the prevalence of burnout in physical therapists in the United States and the relationships between burnout and education, mentorship, and self-efficacy.
Methods This was a cross-sectional survey study. An electronic survey was distributed to practicing physical therapists across the United States over a 6-week period from December 2020 to January 2021. The survey was completed by 2,813 physical therapists from all states. The majority were female (68.72%), White or Caucasian (80.13%), and employed full-time (77.14%). Respondents completed questions on demographics, education, mentorship, self-efficacy, and burnout. The Burnout Clinical Subtypes Questionnaire 12 (BCSQ-12) and self-reports were used to quantify burnout, and the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) was used to measure self-efficacy. Descriptive and inferential analyses were performed.
Results Respondents from home health (median BCSQ-12=42.00) and skilled nursing facility settings (median BCSQ-12=42.00) displayed the highest burnout scores. Burnout was significantly lower among those who provided formal mentorship (median BCSQ-12=39.00, P=0.0001) compared to no mentorship (median BCSQ-12=41.00). Respondents who received formal mentorship (median BCSQ-12=38.00, P=0.0028) displayed significantly lower burnout than those who received no mentorship (median BCSQ-12=41.00). A moderate negative correlation (rho=-0.49) was observed between the GSES and burnout scores. A strong positive correlation was found between self-reported burnout status and burnout scores (rrb=0.61).
Conclusion Burnout is prevalent in the physical therapy profession, as almost half of respondents (49.34%) reported burnout. Providing or receiving mentorship and higher self-efficacy were associated with lower burnout. Organizations should consider measuring burnout levels, investing in mentorship programs, and implementing strategies to improve self-efficacy.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Wellness and Stress Management Practices Among Healthcare Professionals and Health Professional Students Asli C. Yalim, Katherine Daly, Monica Bailey, Denise Kay, Xiang Zhu, Mohammed Patel, Laurie C. Neely, Desiree A. Díaz, Denyi M. Canario Asencio, Karla Rosario, Melissa Cowan, Magdalena Pasarica American Journal of Health Promotion.2025; 39(2): 204. CrossRef
Final results of the National Oncology Mentorship Program 2023 and its impact on burnout and professional fulfilment Udit Nindra, Gowri Shivasabesan, Rhiannon Mellor, Weng Ng, Wei Chua, Deme Karikios, Bethan Richards, Jia Liu Internal Medicine Journal.2025; 55(2): 233. CrossRef
Incidence of Shared Clinical Instruction in Physical Therapy Clinical Education in the United States Nicki Silberman, Lori Hochman, Jaya Rachwani Journal of Physical Therapy Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Assessing and Managing Prevalence of Burnout in Inpatient Occupational and Physical Therapists in an Acute Care Setting Kelly Murphy, Maria Tucker, Laura Cataldo, Sarah Sergeant, Bill Kuklinski, Jordan Billings, Katrina Jancsy Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy.2025; 16(2): 39. CrossRef
Benefits, Challenges, and Strategies for Implementing Shared Clinical Instruction in the United States: A Qualitative Study Nicki Silberman, Lori Hochman, Vicki LaFay, Jennifer Cunningham Journal of Physical Therapy Education.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Interprofessional education to support alcohol use screening and future team-based management of stress-related disorders in vulnerable populations Taylor Fitzpatrick-Schmidt, Scott Edwards Frontiers in Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Prevalence of Stress and Burnout in Physical Therapist Clinical Instructors Ryan J. Pontiff, Peggy Gleeson, Katy Mitchell, Rupal M. Patel Journal of Physical Therapy Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the performance of Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) with respect to standardized urology multiple-choice items in the United States.
Methods In total, 700 multiple-choice urology board exam-style items were submitted to GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, and responses were recorded. Items were categorized based on topic and question complexity (recall, interpretation, and problem-solving). The accuracy of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 was compared across item types in February 2024.
Results GPT-4 answered 44.4% of items correctly compared to 30.9% for GPT-3.5 (P<0.00001). GPT-4 (vs. GPT-3.5) had higher accuracy with urologic oncology (43.8% vs. 33.9%, P=0.03), sexual medicine (44.3% vs. 27.8%, P=0.046), and pediatric urology (47.1% vs. 27.1%, P=0.012) items. Endourology (38.0% vs. 25.7%, P=0.15), reconstruction and trauma (29.0% vs. 21.0%, P=0.41), and neurourology (49.0% vs. 33.3%, P=0.11) items did not show significant differences in performance across versions. GPT-4 also outperformed GPT-3.5 with respect to recall (45.9% vs. 27.4%, P<0.00001), interpretation (45.6% vs. 31.5%, P=0.0005), and problem-solving (41.8% vs. 34.5%, P=0.56) type items. This difference was not significant for the higher-complexity items.
Conclusions ChatGPT performs relatively poorly on standardized multiple-choice urology board exam-style items, with GPT-4 outperforming GPT-3.5. The accuracy was below the proposed minimum passing standards for the American Board of Urology’s Continuing Urologic Certification knowledge reinforcement activity (60%). As artificial intelligence progresses in complexity, ChatGPT may become more capable and accurate with respect to board examination items. For now, its responses should be scrutinized.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Evaluating the Performance of ChatGPT4.0 Versus ChatGPT3.5 on the Hand Surgery Self-Assessment Exam: A Comparative Analysis of Performance on Image-Based Questions Kiera L Vrindten, Megan Hsu, Yuri Han, Brian Rust, Heili Truumees, Brian M Katt Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Assessing the performance of large language models (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) and accurate clinical information for pediatric nephrology Nadide Melike Sav Pediatric Nephrology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Retrieval-augmented generation enhances large language model performance on the Japanese orthopedic board examination Juntaro Maruyama, Satoshi Maki, Takeo Furuya, Yuki Nagashima, Kyota Kitagawa, Yasunori Toki, Shuhei Iwata, Megumi Yazaki, Takaki Kitamura, Sho Gushiken, Yuji Noguchi, Masataka Miura, Masahiro Inoue, Yasuhiro Shiga, Kazuhide Inage, Sumihisa Orita, Seiji Oh Journal of Orthopaedic Science.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Advancements in large language model accuracy for answering physical medicine and rehabilitation board review questions Jason Bitterman, Alexander D'Angelo, Alexandra Holachek, James E. Eubanks PM&R.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
From GPT-3.5 to GPT-4.o: A Leap in AI’s Medical Exam Performance Markus Kipp Information.2024; 15(9): 543. CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence can Facilitate Application of Risk Stratification Algorithms to Bladder Cancer Patient Case Scenarios Max S Yudovich, Ahmad N Alzubaidi, Jay D Raman Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose The present study aimed to investigate the effect of a mini-clinical evaluation exercise (CEX) assessment on improving the clinical skills of nurse anesthesia students at Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.
Methods This study started on November 1, 2022, and ended on December 1, 2022. It was conducted among 50 nurse anesthesia students divided into intervention and control groups. The intervention group’s clinical skills were evaluated 4 times using the mini-CEX method. In contrast, the same skills were evaluated in the control group based on the conventional method—that is, general supervision by the instructor during the internship and a summative evaluation based on a checklist at the end of the course. The intervention group students also filled out a questionnaire to measure their satisfaction with the mini-CEX method.
Results The mean score of the students in both the control and intervention groups increased significantly on the post-test (P<0.0001), but the improvement in the scores of the intervention group was significantly greater compared with the control group (P<0.0001). The overall mean score for satisfaction in the intervention group was 76.3 out of a maximum of 95.
Conclusion The findings of this study showed that using mini-CEX as a formative evaluation method to evaluate clinical skills had a significant effect on the improvement of nurse anesthesia students’ clinical skills, and they had a very favorable opinion about this evaluation method.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Exploring the clinical practice training program for Master of Nursing Specialist in anesthesia: A qualitative study Huihui Hu, Yanxin Gu, Yi Yang, Rui Gao, Peishuang Wang, Fang Zhou Nurse Education Today.2025; 147: 106577. CrossRef
Psychometric testing of anesthesia nursing competence scale (AnestComp) Samira Mahmoudi, Akram Yazdani, Fatemeh Hasanshiri Perioperative Care and Operating Room Management.2024; 34: 100368. CrossRef
Application of flipped classroom teaching method based on ADDIE concept in clinical teaching for neurology residents Juan Zhang, Hong Chen, Xie Wang, Xiaofeng Huang, Daojun Xie BMC Medical Education.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Impactos do Mini-Cex no ensino-aprendizagem da saúde: uma revisão integrativa João Henrique Anizio de Farias, Draenne Micarla dos Santos Silva, Clédson Calixto de Oliveira, Elzenir Pereira de Oliveira Almeida Revista de Gestão e Secretariado.2024; 15(9): e4150. CrossRef
Comparing Satisfaction of Undergraduate Nursing Students`: Mini-CEX vs CIM in Assessing Clinical Competence Somia Saghir, Anny Ashiq Ali, Kashif Khan, Uzma Bibi, Shafaat Ullah, Rafi Ullah, Zaifullah Khan, Tahir Khan Pakistan Journal of Health Sciences.2023; : 134. CrossRef
Enhancement of the technical and non-technical skills of nurse anesthesia students using the Anesthetic List Management Assessment Tool in Iran: a quasi-experimental study Ali Khalafi, Maedeh Kordnejad, Vahid Saidkhani Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 19. CrossRef