ArticleEuropean urology open science2024
Artificial Intelligence: Ready To Pass the European Board Examinations in Urology?
Article in European urology open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of Large Language Models When Answering Clinical Research Questions: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- The emerging landscape of artificial intelligence in robot-assisted surgery: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence chatbots vs. YPUC pediatric urologists: performance on a Campbell Walsh urology hypospadiology questionnaire.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Which current chatbot is more competent in urological theoretical knowledge? A comparative analysis by the European board of urology in-service assessment.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Qualitative metrics from the biomedical literature for evaluating large language models in clinical decision-making: a narrative review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Review
- Artificial intelligence versus human touch: can artificial intelligence accurately generate a literature review on laser technologies?World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Is ChatGPT ready for primetime? Performance of artificial intelligence on a simulated Canadian urology board exam.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024Article
- Article
- Re: Benoît Mesnard, Aurélie Schirmann, Julien Branchereau, et al. Artificial Intelligence: Ready To Pass the European Board Examinations in Urology? Eur Urol Open Sci 2024;60:44-6.European urology open science · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the medical domain is increasing on an annual basis. AI allows instant access to the latest scientific data in urological surgery, facilitating a level of theoretical knowledge that previously required several years of practice and training. To evaluate the capability of AI to provide robust data in a specialized domain, we submitted the in-service assessment of the European Board of Urology to three different AI tools: ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, and Bard. The assessment consists of 100 single-answer questions with four multiple-choice options. We compared the responses of 736 participants to the AI responses. The average score for the 736 participants was 67.20. ChatGPT 3.5 scored 59 points, ranking in 570th place. ChatGPT 4.0 scored 80 points, ranking 80th, just on the border of the top 10%. Google Bard scored 68 points, ranking 340th. Our study demonstrates that AI systems have the capability to participate in a urological examination and achieve satisfactory results. However, a critical perspective must be maintained, as current AI systems are not infallible. Finally, the role of AI in the acquisition of knowledge and the dissemination of information remains to be delineated. Patient summary: We submitted questions from the European Diploma in Urological Surgery to three artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Our findings reveal that AI tools show remarkable performance in assessments of urological surgical knowledge. However, certain limitations were also observed.
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.