ChatGPT 在回答有关大体解剖学不同主题的问题时表现如何?

O. Bolgova, I. Shypilova, Larysa Sankova, Volodymyr Mavrych
{"title":"ChatGPT 在回答有关大体解剖学不同主题的问题时表现如何?","authors":"O. Bolgova, I. Shypilova, Larysa Sankova, Volodymyr Mavrych","doi":"10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.6.1989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The burgeoning interest in leveraging ChatGPT within the medical field underscores the necessity for a comprehensive understanding of its capabilities and limitations, particularly in the context of medical assessments and examinations. The model possesses a unique aptitude for addressing queries related to medical student exams, thereby serving as an invaluable resource for academic support. Its advanced natural language processing capabilities empower it to comprehend the intricacies of medical terminology, enabling it to provide nuanced and contextually relevant responses. This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate ChatGPT performance in answering Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) related to the different topics in Gross Anatomy course for medical students.  The research conducted for this study was focused on a comprehensive examination of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) capabilities in answering 325 MCQs designed in USMLE style, arranged in 7 different sets related to specific topics. These questions were selected from Gross Anatomy course exam database for medical students and reviewed by three independent experts. The results of 5 successive attempts to answer each set of questions by Chat-GPT were evaluated based on accuracy, relevance, and comprehensiveness.  The ChatGPT provided accurate answers to 44.1% ± 8.2% of questions. Accordingly, to our data, ChatGPT is answering much better on MCQs from Back material (58.4%), following Head and Neck (48.8%) and Pelvis (45.6%), and performing not so well in questions of Thorax (37.6%) and Upper limb (36.4%). ChatGPT is struggling in answering questions about blood supply and innervation of the specific organs.  ChatGPT stands out as a promising and interactive educational tool, particularly for students engaged in the study of anatomy. Its distinctive ability to not only provide informative responses but also engage students in a conversational manner is highly commendable. This quality has the potential to enhance student engagement and foster curiosity, creating a dynamic learning experience. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that ChatGPT’s current level of comprehension and interpretative abilities may not meet the demanding standards required for practical applications in the medical education domain. Its performance in challenging examinations like medical college exams and health licensing exams might need to catch up to expectations.","PeriodicalId":508733,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences","volume":" 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Well Did ChatGPT Perform in Answering Questions on Different Topics in Gross Anatomy?\",\"authors\":\"O. Bolgova, I. Shypilova, Larysa Sankova, Volodymyr Mavrych\",\"doi\":\"10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.6.1989\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The burgeoning interest in leveraging ChatGPT within the medical field underscores the necessity for a comprehensive understanding of its capabilities and limitations, particularly in the context of medical assessments and examinations. The model possesses a unique aptitude for addressing queries related to medical student exams, thereby serving as an invaluable resource for academic support. Its advanced natural language processing capabilities empower it to comprehend the intricacies of medical terminology, enabling it to provide nuanced and contextually relevant responses. This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate ChatGPT performance in answering Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) related to the different topics in Gross Anatomy course for medical students.  The research conducted for this study was focused on a comprehensive examination of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) capabilities in answering 325 MCQs designed in USMLE style, arranged in 7 different sets related to specific topics. These questions were selected from Gross Anatomy course exam database for medical students and reviewed by three independent experts. The results of 5 successive attempts to answer each set of questions by Chat-GPT were evaluated based on accuracy, relevance, and comprehensiveness.  The ChatGPT provided accurate answers to 44.1% ± 8.2% of questions. Accordingly, to our data, ChatGPT is answering much better on MCQs from Back material (58.4%), following Head and Neck (48.8%) and Pelvis (45.6%), and performing not so well in questions of Thorax (37.6%) and Upper limb (36.4%). ChatGPT is struggling in answering questions about blood supply and innervation of the specific organs.  ChatGPT stands out as a promising and interactive educational tool, particularly for students engaged in the study of anatomy. Its distinctive ability to not only provide informative responses but also engage students in a conversational manner is highly commendable. This quality has the potential to enhance student engagement and foster curiosity, creating a dynamic learning experience. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that ChatGPT’s current level of comprehension and interpretative abilities may not meet the demanding standards required for practical applications in the medical education domain. Its performance in challenging examinations like medical college exams and health licensing exams might need to catch up to expectations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508733,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences\",\"volume\":\" 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.6.1989\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Medical and Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24018/ejmed.2023.5.6.1989","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医学领域对利用 ChatGPT 的兴趣日渐浓厚,这凸显了全面了解其功能和局限性的必要性,尤其是在医学评估和考试方面。该模型在处理与医学生考试相关的询问方面具有独特的能力,因此是学术支持方面的宝贵资源。其先进的自然语言处理能力使其能够理解错综复杂的医学术语,从而提供细致入微且与上下文相关的回复。本研究旨在定量评估 ChatGPT 在回答与医学生毛解剖学课程不同主题相关的多项选择题 (MCQ) 时的表现。 本研究的重点是全面检查 ChatGPT(GPT-3.5)在回答 325 道按 USMLE 风格设计的 MCQ 时的能力,这些 MCQ 分为 7 组,与特定主题相关。这些问题选自医科学生粗解剖学课程考试数据库,并由三位独立专家审阅。根据准确性、相关性和全面性,对 ChatGPT 连续 5 次尝试回答每组问题的结果进行了评估。 ChatGPT 为 44.1% ± 8.2% 的问题提供了准确答案。根据我们的数据,ChatGPT 对背部材料(58.4%)、头颈部(48.8%)和骨盆(45.6%)的 MCQ 回答得更好,而对胸部(37.6%)和上肢(36.4%)的问题回答得不是很好。ChatGPT 在回答有关特定器官的血液供应和神经支配的问题时显得力不从心。 ChatGPT 是一种很有前途的互动式教育工具,尤其适合学习解剖学的学生。它不仅能提供信息回答,还能以对话的方式吸引学生,这种与众不同的能力值得高度赞扬。这种特质有可能提高学生的参与度,培养好奇心,创造一种动态的学习体验。然而,必须承认的是,ChatGPT 目前的理解和解释能力水平可能无法满足医学教育领域实际应用的苛刻标准。它在医学院考试和卫生许可证考试等具有挑战性的考试中的表现可能需要赶上预期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How Well Did ChatGPT Perform in Answering Questions on Different Topics in Gross Anatomy?
The burgeoning interest in leveraging ChatGPT within the medical field underscores the necessity for a comprehensive understanding of its capabilities and limitations, particularly in the context of medical assessments and examinations. The model possesses a unique aptitude for addressing queries related to medical student exams, thereby serving as an invaluable resource for academic support. Its advanced natural language processing capabilities empower it to comprehend the intricacies of medical terminology, enabling it to provide nuanced and contextually relevant responses. This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate ChatGPT performance in answering Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) related to the different topics in Gross Anatomy course for medical students.  The research conducted for this study was focused on a comprehensive examination of ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) capabilities in answering 325 MCQs designed in USMLE style, arranged in 7 different sets related to specific topics. These questions were selected from Gross Anatomy course exam database for medical students and reviewed by three independent experts. The results of 5 successive attempts to answer each set of questions by Chat-GPT were evaluated based on accuracy, relevance, and comprehensiveness.  The ChatGPT provided accurate answers to 44.1% ± 8.2% of questions. Accordingly, to our data, ChatGPT is answering much better on MCQs from Back material (58.4%), following Head and Neck (48.8%) and Pelvis (45.6%), and performing not so well in questions of Thorax (37.6%) and Upper limb (36.4%). ChatGPT is struggling in answering questions about blood supply and innervation of the specific organs.  ChatGPT stands out as a promising and interactive educational tool, particularly for students engaged in the study of anatomy. Its distinctive ability to not only provide informative responses but also engage students in a conversational manner is highly commendable. This quality has the potential to enhance student engagement and foster curiosity, creating a dynamic learning experience. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that ChatGPT’s current level of comprehension and interpretative abilities may not meet the demanding standards required for practical applications in the medical education domain. Its performance in challenging examinations like medical college exams and health licensing exams might need to catch up to expectations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correlation Between Incidences of Preterm Premature Rupture of Membrane with Leukocyturia and Bacteriuria at Wangaya General Hospital Understanding Autism: Dispelling Myths and Embracing Neurodiversity Initial Developments to Contain SARS-CoV-2 Spread and the Viability of the Virus on Different Surfaces and Environments Serological Study of Typhoid Fever among Patients Attending Nasarawa State University Clinic Keffi, Nigeria Myelomeningocele about 100 Cases and Review of Literature
×
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