ArticleJMIR medical education2025
Performance of ChatGPT-4 on Taiwanese Traditional Chinese Medicine Licensing Examinations: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance Evaluation of Large Language Models in Multilingual Medical Multiple-Choice Questions: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Performance stability despite iteration: evaluating DeepSeek and ChatGPT on Chinese medical licensing examinations.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Reliability and quality assessment of internet videos as guidance for dietary weight loss intervention: a cross-sectional study in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Performance benchmarking of LLMs on Chinese national medical licensing education: Cross-lingual and question-type effects.PloS one · 2026Article
- Virtual case reasoning and AI-assisted diagnostic instruction: an empirical study based on body interact and large language models.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Evaluating GPT-4's visual interpretation and clinical reasoning on emergency settings: A 5-year analysis.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2025Observational
- Supporting postgraduate exam preparation with large language models: implications for traditional Chinese medicine education.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing the adherence of large language models to clinical practice guidelines in Chinese medicine: a content analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI), notably ChatGPT, into medical education, has shown promising results in various medical fields. Nevertheless, its efficacy in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) examinations remains understudied. Objective: This study aims to (1) assess the performance of ChatGPT on the TCM licensing examination in Taiwan and (2) evaluate the model's explainability in answering TCM-related questions to determine its suitability as a TCM learning tool. Methods: We used the GPT-4 model to respond to 480 questions from the 2022 TCM licensing examination. This study compared the performance of the model against that of licensed TCM doctors using 2 approaches, namely direct answer selection and provision of explanations before answer selection. The accuracy and consistency of AI-generated responses were analyzed. Moreover, a breakdown of question characteristics was performed based on the cognitive level, depth of knowledge, types of questions, vignette style, and polarity of questions. Results: ChatGPT achieved an overall accuracy of 43.9%, which was lower than that of 2 human participants (70% and 78.4%). The analysis did not reveal a significant correlation between the accuracy of the model and the characteristics of the questions. An in-depth examination indicated that errors predominantly resulted from a misunderstanding of TCM concepts (55.3%), emphasizing the limitations of the model with regard to its TCM knowledge base and reasoning capability. Conclusions: Although ChatGPT shows promise as an educational tool, its current performance on TCM licensing examinations is lacking. This highlights the need for enhancing AI models with specialized TCM training and suggests a cautious approach to utilizing AI for TCM education. Future research should focus on model improvement and the development of tailored educational applications to support TCM learning.
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.