ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2024
GPT-4o’s competency in answering the simulated written European Board of Interventional Radiology exam compared to a medical student and experts in Germany and its ability to generate exam items on interventional radiology: a descriptive study.
Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Technologies, opportunities, challenges, and future directions for integrating generative artificial intelligence into medical education: a narrative review.Ewha medical journal · 2025Article
- Evaluating Large Language Models for Preoperative Patient Education in Superior Capsular Reconstruction: Comparative Study of Claude, GPT, and Gemini.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluating the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- AI and Interventional Radiology: A Narrative Review of Reviews on Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluating the performance of ChatGPT in patient consultation and image-based preliminary diagnosis in thyroid eye disease.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Performance of ChatGPT and Bard on the medical licensing examinations varies across different cultures: a comparison study.BMC 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine whether ChatGPT-4o, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) platform, was able to pass a simulated written European Board of Interventional Radiology (EBIR) exam and whether GPT-4o can be used to train medical students and interventional radiologists of different levels of expertise by generating exam items on interventional radiology.
methodsGPT-4o was asked to answer 370 simulated exam items of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe (CIRSE) for EBIR preparation (CIRSE Prep). Subsequently, GPT-4o was requested to generate exam items on interventional radiology topics at levels of difficulty suitable for medical students and the EBIR exam. Those generated items were answered by 4 participants, including a medical student, a resident, a consultant, and an EBIR holder. The correctly answered items were counted. One investigator checked the answers and items generated by GPT-4o for correctness and relevance. This work was done from April to July 2024.
resultsGPT-4o correctly answered 248 of the 370 CIRSE Prep items (67.0%). For 50 CIRSE Prep items, the medical student answered 46.0%, the resident 42.0%, the consultant 50.0%, and the EBIR holder 74.0% correctly. All participants answered 82.0% to 92.0% of the 50 GPT-4o generated items at the student level correctly. For the 50 GPT-4o items at the EBIR level, the medical student answered 32.0%, the resident 44.0%, the consultant 48.0%, and the EBIR holder 66.0% correctly. All participants could pass the GPT-4o-generated items for the student level; while the EBIR holder could pass the GPT-4o-generated items for the EBIR level. Two items (0.3%) out of 150 generated by the GPT-4o were assessed as implausible.
conclusionGPT-4o could pass the simulated written EBIR exam and create exam items of varying difficulty to train medical students and interventional radiologists.
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.