Comparative assessment of three AI platforms in answering USMLE Step 1 anatomy questions or identifying anatomical structures on radiographs.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q1 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY Clinical Anatomy Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.1002/ca.24243
Khulood Mohammed Khalid Al-Khater
{"title":"Comparative assessment of three AI platforms in answering USMLE Step 1 anatomy questions or identifying anatomical structures on radiographs.","authors":"Khulood Mohammed Khalid Al-Khater","doi":"10.1002/ca.24243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in education has gained great attention recently. Integration of AI tools in anatomy teaching is currently engaging researchers and academics worldwide. Several AI chatbots have been generated, the most popular being ChatGPT (OpenAI: San Francisco, California, USA). Since its first public release in November 2022, several research papers have pointed to its potential role in anatomy education. However, it is not yet known whether it will prove superior to other available AI tools in this role. This article sheds some light on the current status of research concerning AI applications in anatomy education and compares the performances of three well-known chatbots (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude) in answering anatomy questions. A total of 23 questions were used as prompts for each chatbot. These questions comprised 10 knowledge-based, 10 analysis-based USMLE Step 1-type, and three radiographs. ChatGPT was the most accurate of the three, scoring 100% accuracy. However, in terms of comprehensiveness, Claude was the best; it gave very organized anatomical responses. Gemini performed less well than the other two, with a scored accuracy of 60% and less scientific explanations. On the basis of these findings, this study recommends the incorporation of Claude and ChatGPT in anatomy education, but not Gemini, at least in its current state.</p>","PeriodicalId":50687,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Anatomy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Anatomy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.24243","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in education has gained great attention recently. Integration of AI tools in anatomy teaching is currently engaging researchers and academics worldwide. Several AI chatbots have been generated, the most popular being ChatGPT (OpenAI: San Francisco, California, USA). Since its first public release in November 2022, several research papers have pointed to its potential role in anatomy education. However, it is not yet known whether it will prove superior to other available AI tools in this role. This article sheds some light on the current status of research concerning AI applications in anatomy education and compares the performances of three well-known chatbots (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude) in answering anatomy questions. A total of 23 questions were used as prompts for each chatbot. These questions comprised 10 knowledge-based, 10 analysis-based USMLE Step 1-type, and three radiographs. ChatGPT was the most accurate of the three, scoring 100% accuracy. However, in terms of comprehensiveness, Claude was the best; it gave very organized anatomical responses. Gemini performed less well than the other two, with a scored accuracy of 60% and less scientific explanations. On the basis of these findings, this study recommends the incorporation of Claude and ChatGPT in anatomy education, but not Gemini, at least in its current state.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较评估三种人工智能平台在回答 USMLE 第 1 步解剖学问题或在 X 光片上识别解剖结构方面的表现。
人工智能(AI)在教育领域的应用近来备受关注。目前,将人工智能工具融入解剖学教学正吸引着世界各地的研究人员和学者。目前已经产生了几个人工智能聊天机器人,其中最受欢迎的是ChatGPT(OpenAI:美国加利福尼亚州旧金山)。自 2022 年 11 月首次公开发布以来,已有多篇研究论文指出了它在解剖学教育中的潜在作用。然而,它在解剖学教育中的作用是否会优于其他现有的人工智能工具,目前还不得而知。本文介绍了解剖学教育中人工智能应用的研究现状,并比较了三个著名聊天机器人(ChatGPT、Gemini 和 Claude)在回答解剖学问题时的表现。每个聊天机器人共使用了 23 个问题作为提示。这些问题包括 10 个基于知识的问题、10 个基于分析的 USMLE 第 1 步类型问题和 3 个射线照片问题。ChatGPT 是三个聊天机器人中最准确的,准确率达到 100%。不过,就全面性而言,Claude 是最好的;它给出的解剖学回答非常有条理。双子座的表现不如其他两个,准确率只有 60%,解释也不够科学。基于这些发现,本研究建议将 Claude 和 ChatGPT 纳入解剖学教学,但不建议使用 Gemini,至少在其目前的状态下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Anatomy
Clinical Anatomy 医学-解剖学与形态学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Anatomy is the Official Journal of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists and the British Association of Clinical Anatomists. The goal of Clinical Anatomy is to provide a medium for the exchange of current information between anatomists and clinicians. This journal embraces anatomy in all its aspects as applied to medical practice. Furthermore, the journal assists physicians and other health care providers in keeping abreast of new methodologies for patient management and informs educators of new developments in clinical anatomy and teaching techniques. Clinical Anatomy publishes original and review articles of scientific, clinical, and educational interest. Papers covering the application of anatomic principles to the solution of clinical problems and/or the application of clinical observations to expand anatomic knowledge are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
"Practical Anatomy is to medical men what mathematics are to the physicist". Using large language models (ChatGPT, Copilot, PaLM, Bard, and Gemini) in Gross Anatomy course: Comparative analysis. Is dissection or prosection equal in dental anatomy education? Comparative assessment of three AI platforms in answering USMLE Step 1 anatomy questions or identifying anatomical structures on radiographs. Treatment of thoracic outlet syndrome to relieve chronic migraine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1