ArticleAcademic pathology
ChatGPT 3.5 fails to write appropriate multiple choice practice exam questions.
Article in Academic pathology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Evaluation of the accuracy, quality, and readability of large language models on local anesthesia and general anesthesia-sedation in dentistry.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Zero-shot performance of selected large language and multimodal models on the 2023 Brazilian Portuguese medical residency exam.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of artificial intelligence language models on knowledge of dental antibiotic use.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in medical ethics education: a descriptive study of eight models in multiple choice question generation.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- A comparative evaluation of two large language models in pediatric dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- When Assessment Theory Meets Generative AI: Reimagining SBA Design in Medical Education.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Article
- Human Expertise Outperforms Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education Assessments: MCQ Creation Highlights the Irreplaceable Role of Teachers.Avicenna journal of medicine · 2025Article
- Using a Hybrid of AI and Template-Based Method in Automatic Item Generation to Create Multiple-Choice Questions in Medical Education: Hybrid AIG.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- AI versus human-generated multiple-choice questions for medical education: a cohort study in a high-stakes examination.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Challenging the curve: can ChatGPT-generated MCQs reduce grade inflation in pharmacy education.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Applications of Large Language Models in Pathology.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Evaluating artificial intelligence-generated multiple-choice questions in clinical pathology.Academic pathologyArticle
- Assessing the Utility of AI Versus Human-Created MCQs in Pediatric Medical Education.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
- ChatGPT's ability or prompt quality: what determines the success of generating multiple-choice questions.Academic pathologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) may have a profound impact on traditional teaching in academic settings. Multiple concerns have been raised, especially related to using ChatGPT for creating
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.