Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

JEEHP : Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Most cited articles

Page Path
HOME > Browse articles > Most cited articles
38 Most cited articles
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Funded articles

From articles published in Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions during the past two years (2023 ~ ).

Brief report
Are ChatGPT’s knowledge and interpretation ability comparable to those of medical students in Korea for taking a parasitology examination?: a descriptive study  
Sun Huh
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:1.   Published online January 11, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.1
  • 14,983 View
  • 1,118 Download
  • 185 Web of Science
  • 94 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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
  • Examining Real-World Medication Consultations and Drug-Herb Interactions: ChatGPT Performance Evaluation
    Hsing-Yu Hsu, Kai-Cheng Hsu, Shih-Yen Hou, Ching-Lung Wu, Yow-Wen Hsieh, Yih-Dih Cheng
    JMIR Medical Education.2023; 9: e48433.     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
Review
Can an artificial intelligence chatbot be the author of a scholarly article?  
Ju Yoen Lee
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:6.   Published online February 27, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.6
  • 11,713 View
  • 810 Download
  • 58 Web of Science
  • 56 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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  
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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.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
Editorial
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
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:5.   Published online January 31, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.5
  • 4,426 View
  • 308 Download
  • 19 Web of Science
  • 19 Crossref
PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • 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
Research article
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 Panta Quezada, Jesus Daniel Gutierrez-Arratia, Javier Alejandro Flores-Cohaila
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:30.   Published online November 20, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.30
  • 3,074 View
  • 222 Download
  • 13 Web of Science
  • 18 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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
  • 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;[Epub]     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
  • Using large language models (ChatGPT, Copilot, PaLM, Bard, and Gemini) in Gross Anatomy course: Comparative analysis
    Volodymyr Mavrych, Paul Ganguly, Olena Bolgova
    Clinical Anatomy.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
Reviews
Application of artificial intelligence chatbots, including ChatGPT, in education, scholarly work, programming, and content generation and its prospects: a narrative review
Tae Won Kim
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:38.   Published online December 27, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.38
  • 9,886 View
  • 1,073 Download
  • 15 Web of Science
  • 17 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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
Opportunities, challenges, and future directions of large language models, including ChatGPT in medical education: a systematic scoping review  
Xiaojun Xu, Yixiao Chen, Jing Miao
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2024;21:6.   Published online March 15, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.6
  • 6,055 View
  • 573 Download
  • 11 Web of Science
  • 15 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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
Research article
Efficacy and limitations of ChatGPT as a biostatistical problem-solving tool in medical education in Serbia: a descriptive study  
Aleksandra Ignjatović, Lazar Stevanović
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:28.   Published online October 16, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.28
  • 4,015 View
  • 218 Download
  • 10 Web of Science
  • 12 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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;[Epub]     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
Review
How to review and assess a systematic review and meta-analysis article: a methodological study (secondary publication)  
Seung-Kwon Myung
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:24.   Published online August 27, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.24
  • 11,488 View
  • 819 Download
  • 13 Web of Science
  • 12 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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  
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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.2024;[Epub]     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
Research articles
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
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:29.   Published online November 10, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.29
  • 3,319 View
  • 235 Download
  • 6 Web of Science
  • 8 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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  
  • 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
  • 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
ChatGPT (GPT-4) passed the Japanese National License Examination for Pharmacists in 2022, answering all items including those with diagrams: a descriptive study  
Hiroyasu Sato, Katsuhiko Ogasawara
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2024;21:4.   Published online February 28, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.4
  • 2,637 View
  • 285 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 7 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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  
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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.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
Improvement of the clinical skills of nurse anesthesia students using mini-clinical evaluation exercises in Iran: a randomized controlled study  
Ali Khalafi, Yasamin Sharbatdar, Nasrin Khajeali, Mohammad Hosein Haghighizadeh, Mahshid Vaziri
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:12.   Published online April 6, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.12
  • 3,528 View
  • 137 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 6 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
Priorities in updating training paradigms in orthopedic manual therapy: an international Delphi study  
Damian Keter, David Griswold, Kenneth Learman, Chad Cook
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:4.   Published online January 27, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.4
  • 4,238 View
  • 284 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 6 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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  
  • 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

    MSK – Muskuloskelettale Physiotherapie.2024; 28(04): 204.     CrossRef
  • 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
Mentorship and self-efficacy are associated with lower burnout in physical therapists in the United States: a cross-sectional survey study  
Matthew Pugliese, Jean-Michel Brismée, Brad Allen, Sean Riley, Justin Tammany, Paul Mintken
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:27.   Published online September 27, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.27
  • 5,915 View
  • 432 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 5 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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
Brief report
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
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2023;20:17.   Published online June 12, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2023.20.17
  • 3,176 View
  • 157 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 4 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Learning about one’s implicit bias is crucial for improving one’s cultural competency and thereby reducing health inequity. To evaluate bias among medical students following a previously developed cultural training program targeting New Zealand Māori, we developed a text-based, self-evaluation tool called the Similarity Rating Test (SRT). The development process of the SRT was resource-intensive, limiting its generalizability and applicability. Here, we explored the potential of ChatGPT, an automated chatbot, to assist in the development process of the SRT by comparing ChatGPT’s and students’ evaluations of the SRT. Despite results showing non-significant equivalence and difference between ChatGPT’s and students’ ratings, ChatGPT’s ratings were more consistent than students’ ratings. The consistency rate was higher for non-stereotypical than for stereotypical statements, regardless of rater type. Further studies are warranted to validate ChatGPT’s potential for assisting in SRT development for implementation in medical education and evaluation of ethnic stereotypes and related topics.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • The Performance of ChatGPT on Short-answer Questions in a Psychiatry Examination: A Pilot Study
    Chao-Cheng Lin, Kobus du Plooy, Andrew Gray, Deirdre Brown, Linda Hobbs, Tess Patterson, Valerie Tan, Daniel Fridberg, Che-Wei Hsu
    Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry.2024; 38(2): 94.     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
  • Psychiatric Care, Training and Research in Aotearoa New Zealand
    Chao-Cheng (Chris) Lin, Charlotte Mentzel, Maria Luz C. Querubin
    Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry.2024; 38(4): 161.     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
Research article
Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on standardized urology knowledge assessment items in the United States: a descriptive study
Max Samuel Yudovich, Elizaveta Makarova, Christian Michael Hague, Jay Dilip Raman
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2024;21:17.   Published online July 8, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.17
  • 2,079 View
  • 312 Download
  • 2 Web of Science
  • 3 Crossref
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
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
  • 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

JEEHP : Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions
TOP