Performance of ChatGPT-4 on Taiwanese Traditional Chinese Medicine Licensing Examinations: Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 3.2 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES JMIR Medical Education Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.2196/58897
Liang-Wei Tseng, Yi-Chin Lu, Liang-Chi Tseng, Yu-Chun Chen, Hsing-Yu Chen
{"title":"Performance of ChatGPT-4 on Taiwanese Traditional Chinese Medicine Licensing Examinations: Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Liang-Wei Tseng, Yi-Chin Lu, Liang-Chi Tseng, Yu-Chun Chen, Hsing-Yu Chen","doi":"10.2196/58897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integration of artificial intelligence (AI), notably ChatGPT, into medical education, has shown promising results in various medical fields. Nevertheless, its efficacy in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) examinations remains understudied.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to (1) assess the performance of ChatGPT on the TCM licensing examination in Taiwan and (2) evaluate the model's explainability in answering TCM-related questions to determine its suitability as a TCM learning tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used the GPT-4 model to respond to 480 questions from the 2022 TCM licensing examination. This study compared the performance of the model against that of licensed TCM doctors using 2 approaches, namely direct answer selection and provision of explanations before answer selection. The accuracy and consistency of AI-generated responses were analyzed. Moreover, a breakdown of question characteristics was performed based on the cognitive level, depth of knowledge, types of questions, vignette style, and polarity of questions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ChatGPT achieved an overall accuracy of 43.9%, which was lower than that of 2 human participants (70% and 78.4%). The analysis did not reveal a significant correlation between the accuracy of the model and the characteristics of the questions. An in-depth examination indicated that errors predominantly resulted from a misunderstanding of TCM concepts (55.3%), emphasizing the limitations of the model with regard to its TCM knowledge base and reasoning capability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although ChatGPT shows promise as an educational tool, its current performance on TCM licensing examinations is lacking. This highlights the need for enhancing AI models with specialized TCM training and suggests a cautious approach to utilizing AI for TCM education. Future research should focus on model improvement and the development of tailored educational applications to support TCM learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":36236,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Education","volume":"11 ","pages":"e58897"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/58897","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI), notably ChatGPT, into medical education, has shown promising results in various medical fields. Nevertheless, its efficacy in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) examinations remains understudied.

Objective: This study aims to (1) assess the performance of ChatGPT on the TCM licensing examination in Taiwan and (2) evaluate the model's explainability in answering TCM-related questions to determine its suitability as a TCM learning tool.

Methods: We used the GPT-4 model to respond to 480 questions from the 2022 TCM licensing examination. This study compared the performance of the model against that of licensed TCM doctors using 2 approaches, namely direct answer selection and provision of explanations before answer selection. The accuracy and consistency of AI-generated responses were analyzed. Moreover, a breakdown of question characteristics was performed based on the cognitive level, depth of knowledge, types of questions, vignette style, and polarity of questions.

Results: ChatGPT achieved an overall accuracy of 43.9%, which was lower than that of 2 human participants (70% and 78.4%). The analysis did not reveal a significant correlation between the accuracy of the model and the characteristics of the questions. An in-depth examination indicated that errors predominantly resulted from a misunderstanding of TCM concepts (55.3%), emphasizing the limitations of the model with regard to its TCM knowledge base and reasoning capability.

Conclusions: Although ChatGPT shows promise as an educational tool, its current performance on TCM licensing examinations is lacking. This highlights the need for enhancing AI models with specialized TCM training and suggests a cautious approach to utilizing AI for TCM education. Future research should focus on model improvement and the development of tailored educational applications to support TCM learning.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Medical Education
JMIR Medical Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
54
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Creation of the ECHO Idaho Podcast: Tutorial and Pilot Assessment. Performance of Plug-In Augmented ChatGPT and Its Ability to Quantify Uncertainty: Simulation Study on the German Medical Board Examination. Performance of ChatGPT-4 on Taiwanese Traditional Chinese Medicine Licensing Examinations: Cross-Sectional Study. Author's Reply: Examining Multimodal AI Resources in Medical Education: The Role of Immersion, Motivation, and Fidelity in AI Narrative Learning. Examining Multimodal AI Resources in Medical Education: The Role of Immersion, Motivation, and Fidelity in AI Narrative Learning.
×
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