Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37285018›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2023

ChatGPT's quiz skills in different otolaryngology subspecialties: an analysis of 2576 single-choice and multiple-choice board certification preparation questions.

Cosima C Hoch, Barbara Wollenberg, Jan-Christoffer Lüers, Samuel Knoedler, Leonard Knoedler, Konstantin Frank, Sebastian Cotofana, Michael Alfertshofer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

82 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical decision support using large language models in otolaryngology: a systematic review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Turing problems in otolaryngology: a scoping review of the principal challenges of artificial ıntelligence and large language models.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Benchmarking next-generation large language models in otorhinolaryngology: a prospective, guideline-anchored, blinded evaluation of ChatGPT-5, Gemini-3, Grok-2, Llama-4, and DeepSeek-4 across case scenarios.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. ChatGPT as an information source for cochlear implants: A study on accuracy and reproducibility.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  12. Artificial Intelligence Models for Dysphonia Patient Education.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. ChatGPT versus DeepSeek in head and neck cancer staging and treatment planning: guideline-based study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Cosima C HochDepartment of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaningerstrasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. cosima.chiara.hoch@tum.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3875-7389
Barbara WollenbergDepartment of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaningerstrasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Jan-Christoffer LüersDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Faculty, University of Cologne, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Samuel KnoedlerDivision of Plastic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02152, USA.
Leonard KnoedlerDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Konstantin FrankOcean Clinic, Marbella, Spain.
Sebastian CotofanaDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Michael AlfertshoferDivision of Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWith the increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in various domains, including healthcare, there is growing acceptance and interest in consulting AI models to provide medical information and advice. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of ChatGPT's responses to practice quiz questions designed for otolaryngology board certification and decipher potential performance disparities across different otolaryngology subspecialties.

methodsA dataset covering 15 otolaryngology subspecialties was collected from an online learning platform funded by the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, designed for board certification examination preparation. These questions were entered into ChatGPT, with its responses being analyzed for accuracy and variance in performance.

resultsThe dataset included 2576 questions (479 multiple-choice and 2097 single-choice), of which 57% (n = 1475) were answered correctly by ChatGPT. An in-depth analysis of question style revealed that single-choice questions were associated with a significantly higher rate (p < 0.001) of correct responses (n = 1313; 63%) compared to multiple-choice questions (n = 162; 34%). Stratified by question categories, ChatGPT yielded the highest rate of correct responses (n = 151; 72%) in the field of allergology, whereas 7 out of 10 questions (n = 65; 71%) on legal otolaryngology aspects were answered incorrectly.

conclusionThe study reveals ChatGPT's potential as a supplementary tool for otolaryngology board certification preparation. However, its propensity for errors in certain otolaryngology areas calls for further refinement. Future research should address these limitations to improve ChatGPT's educational use. An approach, with expert collaboration, is recommended for the reliable and accurate integration of such AI models.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceOtolaryngologyCertificationEducational StatusHumansReferral and ConsultationAIArtificial intelligenceChatGPTMultiple-choiceOtolaryngology quizSingle-choice

Identifiers

PMID37285018
PMCPMC10382366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.