ArticleCureus2023
Evaluating ChatGPT's Ability to Solve Higher-Order Questions on the Competency-Based Medical Education Curriculum in Medical Biochemistry.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 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
41 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
- Integrating ChatGPT in Orthopedic Education for Medical Undergraduates: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- The Utility of ChatGPT for Medical Students on Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Rotations.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- AI Use for Medical Students: Impact on Clinical Skill Acquisition and Retention. A Systematic Review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Review
- Advantages and Limitations of ChatGPT in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 2025Review
- The role of generative AI tools in case-based learning and teaching evaluation of medical biochemistry.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- Large Language Models in Biochemistry Education: Comparative Evaluation of Performance.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- ChatGPT and Other Large Language Models in Medical Education - Scoping Literature Review.Medical science educator · 2025Review
- Is your curriculum GenAI-proof? A method for GenAI impact assessment and a case study.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2025Article
- ChatGPT (GPT-4V) Performance on the Healthcare Information Technologist Examination in Japan.Cureus · 2025Article
- Challenge, integration, and change: ChatGPT and future anatomical education.Medical education online · 2024Article
- Exploring ChatGPT in clinical inquiry: a scoping review of characteristics, applications, challenges, and evaluation.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Article
- Article
- Performance of ChatGPT on Nursing Licensure Examinations in the United States and China: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- Enhancing Orthopedic Knowledge Assessments: The Performance of Specialized Generative Language Model Optimization.Current medical science · 2024Article
- A framework for human evaluation of large language models in healthcare derived from literature review.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Potential of ChatGPT to Pass the Japanese Medical and Healthcare Professional National Licenses: A Literature Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Appraisal of ChatGPT's Aptitude for Medical Education: Comparative Analysis With Third-Year Medical Students in a Pulmonology Examination.JMIR medical education · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Healthcare-related artificial intelligence (AI) is developing. The capacity of the system to carry out sophisticated cognitive processes, such as problem-solving, decision-making, reasoning, and perceiving, is referred to as higher cognitive thinking in AI. This kind of thinking requires more than just processing facts; it also entails comprehending and working with abstract ideas, evaluating and applying data relevant to the context, and producing new insights based on prior learning and experience. ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence-based conversational software that can engage with people to answer questions and uses natural language processing models. The platform has created a worldwide buzz and keeps setting an ongoing trend in solving many complex problems in various dimensions. Nevertheless, ChatGPT's capacity to correctly respond to queries requiring higher-level thinking in medical biochemistry has not yet been investigated. So, this research aimed to evaluate ChatGPT's aptitude for responding to higher-order questions on medical biochemistry. Objective In this study, our objective was to determine whether ChatGPT can address higher-order problems related to medical biochemistry. Methods This cross-sectional study was done online by conversing with the current version of ChatGPT (14 March 2023, which is presently free for registered users). It was presented with 200 medical biochemistry reasoning questions that require higher-order thinking. These questions were randomly picked from the institution's question bank and classified according to the Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) curriculum's competency modules. The responses were collected and archived for subsequent research. Two expert biochemistry academicians examined the replies on a zero to five scale. The score's accuracy was determined by a one-sample Wilcoxon signed rank test using hypothetical values. Result The AI software answered 200 questions requiring higher-order thinking with a median score of 4.0 (Q1=3.50, Q3=4.50). Using a single sample Wilcoxon signed rank test, the result was less than the hypothetical maximum of five (p=0.001) and comparable to four (p=0.16). There was no difference in the replies to questions from different CBME modules in medical biochemistry (Kruskal-Wallis p=0.39). The inter-rater reliability of the scores scored by two biochemistry faculty members was outstanding (ICC=0.926 (95% CI: 0.814-0.971); F=19; p=0.001) Conclusion The results of this research indicate that ChatGPT has the potential to be a successful tool for answering questions requiring higher-order thinking in medical biochemistry, with a median score of four out of five. However, continuous training and development with data of recent advances are essential to improve performance and make it functional for the ever-growing field of academic medical usage.
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.