Performance of ChatGPT on Nephrology Test Questions

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

ChatGPT is a novel tool that allows people to engage in conversations with an advanced machine learning model. ChatGPT's performance in the US Medical Licensing Examination is comparable with a successful candidate's performance. However, its performance in the nephrology field remains undetermined. This study assessed ChatGPT's capabilities in answering nephrology test questions.

Methods

Questions sourced from Nephrology Self-Assessment Program and Kidney Self-Assessment Program were used, each with multiple-choice single-answer questions. Questions containing visual elements were excluded. Each question bank was run twice using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Total accuracy rate, defined as the percentage of correct answers obtained by ChatGPT in either the first or second run, and the total concordance, defined as the percentage of identical answers provided by ChatGPT during both runs, regardless of their correctness, were used to assess its performance.

Results

A comprehensive assessment was conducted on a set of 975 questions, comprising 508 questions from Nephrology Self-Assessment Program and 467 from Kidney Self-Assessment Program. GPT-3.5 resulted in a total accuracy rate of 51%. Notably, the employment of Nephrology Self-Assessment Program yielded a higher accuracy rate compared with Kidney Self-Assessment Program (58% versus 44%; P < 0.001). The total concordance rate across all questions was 78%, with correct answers exhibiting a higher concordance rate (84%) compared with incorrect answers (73%) ( P < 0.001). When examining various nephrology subfields, the total accuracy rates were relatively lower in electrolyte and acid-base disorder, glomerular disease, and kidney-related bone and stone disorders. The total accuracy rate of GPT-4's response was 74%, higher than GPT-3.5 ( P < 0.001) but remained below the passing threshold and average scores of nephrology examinees (77%).

Conclusions

ChatGPT exhibited limitations regarding accuracy and repeatability when addressing nephrology-related questions. Variations in performance were evident across various subfields.

Related collections

Most cited references 26

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models

Tiffany H. Kung, Morgan Cheatham, Arielle Medenilla … (2023)

We evaluated the performance of a large language model called ChatGPT on the United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE), which consists of three exams: Step 1, Step 2CK, and Step 3. ChatGPT performed at or near the passing threshold for all three exams without any specialized training or reinforcement. Additionally, ChatGPT demonstrated a high level of concordance and insight in its explanations. These results suggest that large language models may have the potential to assist with medical education, and potentially, clinical decision-making.

0 comments Cited 649 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns

Malik Sallam (2023)

ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI)-based conversational large language model (LLM). The potential applications of LLMs in health care education, research, and practice could be promising if the associated valid concerns are proactively examined and addressed. The current systematic review aimed to investigate the utility of ChatGPT in health care education, research, and practice and to highlight its potential limitations. Using the PRIMSA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted to retrieve English records in PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar (published research or preprints) that examined ChatGPT in the context of health care education, research, or practice. A total of 60 records were eligible for inclusion. Benefits of ChatGPT were cited in 51/60 (85.0%) records and included: (1) improved scientific writing and enhancing research equity and versatility; (2) utility in health care research (efficient analysis of datasets, code generation, literature reviews, saving time to focus on experimental design, and drug discovery and development); (3) benefits in health care practice (streamlining the workflow, cost saving, documentation, personalized medicine, and improved health literacy); and (4) benefits in health care education including improved personalized learning and the focus on critical thinking and problem-based learning. Concerns regarding ChatGPT use were stated in 58/60 (96.7%) records including ethical, copyright, transparency, and legal issues, the risk of bias, plagiarism, lack of originality, inaccurate content with risk of hallucination, limited knowledge, incorrect citations, cybersecurity issues, and risk of infodemics. The promising applications of ChatGPT can induce paradigm shifts in health care education, research, and practice. However, the embrace of this AI chatbot should be conducted with extreme caution considering its potential limitations. As it currently stands, ChatGPT does not qualify to be listed as an author in scientific articles unless the ICMJE/COPE guidelines are revised or amended. An initiative involving all stakeholders in health care education, research, and practice is urgently needed. This will help to set a code of ethics to guide the responsible use of ChatGPT among other LLMs in health care and academia.

0 comments Cited 383 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

How Does ChatGPT Perform on the United States Medical Licensing Examination? The Implications of Large Language Models for Medical Education and Knowledge Assessment

Aidan Gilson, Conrad W Safranek, Thomas Huang … (2023)

Background Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) is a 175-billion-parameter natural language processing model that can generate conversation-style responses to user input. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT on questions within the scope of the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 and Step 2 exams, as well as to analyze responses for user interpretability. Methods We used 2 sets of multiple-choice questions to evaluate ChatGPT’s performance, each with questions pertaining to Step 1 and Step 2. The first set was derived from AMBOSS, a commonly used question bank for medical students, which also provides statistics on question difficulty and the performance on an exam relative to the user base. The second set was the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) free 120 questions. ChatGPT’s performance was compared to 2 other large language models, GPT-3 and InstructGPT. The text output of each ChatGPT response was evaluated across 3 qualitative metrics: logical justification of the answer selected, presence of information internal to the question, and presence of information external to the question. Results Of the 4 data sets, AMBOSS-Step1 , AMBOSS-Step2 , NBME-Free-Step1 , and NBME-Free-Step2 , ChatGPT achieved accuracies of 44% (44/100), 42% (42/100), 64.4% (56/87), and 57.8% (59/102), respectively. ChatGPT outperformed InstructGPT by 8.15% on average across all data sets, and GPT-3 performed similarly to random chance. The model demonstrated a significant decrease in performance as question difficulty increased ( P =.01) within the AMBOSS-Step1 data set. We found that logical justification for ChatGPT’s answer selection was present in 100% of outputs of the NBME data sets. Internal information to the question was present in 96.8% (183/189) of all questions. The presence of information external to the question was 44.5% and 27% lower for incorrect answers relative to correct answers on the NBME-Free-Step1 ( P <.001) and NBME-Free-Step2 ( P =.001) data sets, respectively. Conclusions ChatGPT marks a significant improvement in natural language processing models on the tasks of medical question answering. By performing at a greater than 60% threshold on the NBME-Free-Step-1 data set, we show that the model achieves the equivalent of a passing score for a third-year medical student. Additionally, we highlight ChatGPT’s capacity to provide logic and informational context across the majority of answers. These facts taken together make a compelling case for the potential applications of ChatGPT as an interactive medical education tool to support learning.