ArticleCureus2024
The Performance of ChatGPT on the American Society for Surgery of the Hand Self-Assessment Examination.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 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
- Exploring ChatGPT's Efficacy in Orthopaedic Arthroplasty Questions Compared to Adult Reconstruction Surgeons.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Comparison of hand surgery certification exams in Europe and the United States using ChatGPT 4.0.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2025Article
- Assessing the performance of ChatGPT-4o on the Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Board Examination.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2025Article
- An Assessment of the Performance of Different Chatbots on Shoulder and Elbow Questions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer and Microsoft Copilot Performance on the American Society of Surgery of the Hand Self-Assessment Examinations.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to compare the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 (GPT-3.5) and ChatGPT-4 (GPT-4) on the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) Self-Assessment Examination (SAE) to determine their potential as educational tools.
methodsThis study assessed the proportion of correct answers to text-based questions on the 2021 and 2022 ASSH SAE between untrained ChatGPT versions. Secondary analyses assessed the performance of ChatGPT based on question difficulty and question category. The outcomes of ChatGPT were compared with the performance of actual examinees on the ASSH SAE.
resultsA total of 238 questions were included in the analysis. Compared with GPT-3.5, GPT-4 provided significantly more correct answers overall (58.0% versus 68.9%, respectively
conclusionsGPT-4 demonstrated improved performance over GPT-3.5 on the ASSH SAE, especially on more difficult questions. Actual examinees scored higher than both versions of ChatGPT, but the margin was cut in half by GPT-4.
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.