ArticleCureus2023
Assessing the Capability of ChatGPT in Answering First- and Second-Order Knowledge Questions on Microbiology as per Competency-Based Medical Education Curriculum.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative analysis of ChatGPT and Gemini (Bard) in medical inquiry: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Assessment of the efficacy of ChatGPT responses to bacterial species-specific questions in microbiology.Access microbiology · 2026Article
- Can ChatGPT be trusted? Evaluating AI responses to oral health questions among pregnant Arabic-speaking women.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Assessing the Accuracy and Completeness of AI-Generated Dental Responses: An Evaluation of the Chat-GPT Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Can ChatGPT pass the Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Board Examination? Turkish orthopedic surgeons versus artificial intelligence.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025Observational
- Review
- Perceptions and Earliest Experiences of Medical Students and Faculty With ChatGPT in Medical Education: Qualitative Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Exploring the role of artificial intelligence, large language models: Comparing patient-focused information and clinical decision support capabilities to the gynecologic oncology guidelines.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- ChatGPT and Other Large Language Models in Medical Education - Scoping Literature Review.Medical science educator · 2025Review
- Performance of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots on Ultrasound Examinations: Cross-Sectional Comparative Analysis.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Experiences of nursing and medical students with the use of Artificial Intelligence tools such as ChatGPT in Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- GastroGPT: Development and controlled testing of a proof-of-concept customized clinical language model.Endoscopy international open · 2025Article
- Widespread use of ChatGPT and other Artificial Intelligence tools among medical students in Uganda: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Exploring Radiology Postgraduate Students' Engagement with Large Language Models for Educational Purposes: A Study of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2025Article
- Exploring ChatGPT in clinical inquiry: a scoping review of characteristics, applications, challenges, and evaluation.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) language model that has been trained to process and respond to questions across a wide range of topics. It is also capable of solving problems in medical educational topics. However, the capability of ChatGPT to accurately answer first- and second-order knowledge questions in the field of microbiology has not been explored so far. Hence, in this study, we aimed to analyze the capability of ChatGPT in answering first- and second-order questions on the subject of microbiology. Materials and methods Based on the competency-based medical education (CBME) curriculum of the subject of microbiology, we prepared a set of first-order and second-order questions. For the total of eight modules in the CBME curriculum for microbiology, we prepared six first-order and six second-order knowledge questions according to the National Medical Commission-recommended CBME curriculum, amounting to a total of (8 x 12) 96 questions. The questions were checked for content validity by three expert microbiologists. These questions were used to converse with ChatGPT by a single user and responses were recorded for further analysis. The answers were scored by three microbiologists on a rating scale of 0-5. The average of three scores was taken as the final score for analysis. As the data were not normally distributed, we used a non-parametric statistical test. The overall scores were tested by a one-sample median test with hypothetical values of 4 and 5. The scores of answers to first-order and second-order questions were compared by the Mann-Whitney U test. Module-wise responses were tested by the Kruskall-Wallis test followed by the post hoc test for pairwise comparisons. Results The overall score of 96 answers was 4.04 ±0.37 (median: 4.17, Q1-Q3: 3.88-4.33) with the mean score of answers to first-order knowledge questions being 4.07 ±0.32 (median: 4.17, Q1-Q3: 4-4.33) and that of answers to second-order knowledge questions being 3.99 ±0.43 (median: 4, Q1-Q3: 3.67-4.33) (Mann-Whitney p=0.4). The score was significantly below the score of 5 (one-sample median test p<0.0001) and similar to 4 (one-sample median test p=0.09). Overall, there was a variation in median scores obtained in eight categories of topics in microbiology, indicating inconsistent performance in different topics. Conclusion The results of the study indicate that ChatGPT is capable of answering both first- and second-order knowledge questions related to the subject of microbiology. The model achieved an accuracy of approximately 80% and there was no difference between the model's capability of answering first-order questions and second-order knowledge questions. The findings of this study suggest that ChatGPT has the potential to be an effective tool for automated question-answering in the field of microbiology. However, continued improvement in the training and development of language models is necessary to enhance their performance and make them suitable for academic use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.