ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025
Performance of Large Language Models in the Non-English Context: Qualitative Study of Models Trained on Different Languages in Chinese Medical Examinations.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Dental Students on Context of Dental Trauma.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026Article
- Large Language Models for Ophthalmology Training in China: A Prospective Evaluation.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Performance of Large Language Models for Oncology Nursing Decision Support: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Reimagining plant science training in the era of generative artificial intelligence: a global perspective.The Plant cell · 2026Review
- Clinical Plausibility in Large Language Model Robustness Testing for Medicine: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Automated Identification of Nursing Diagnoses and Interventions From Nursing Records Using a Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Model Approach: Quantitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Comparative performance of recent and prior large language models and pediatric residents on pediatric in-training examination questions.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Performance of five large language models in oral and maxillofacial surgery exam questions: a comparative study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Dermatology "AI Babylon": Cross-Language Evaluation of AI-Crafted Dermatology Descriptions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Beyond accuracy: evaluating the reliability of large language models for medical assessment.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Language-dependent variation in observed mechanistic performance of web-enabled large language models across myeloid-mucosal immune contexts: a blinded expert evaluation.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Benchmarking large language models on a Chinese radiation oncology technology examination-preparation question set: accuracy, consensus, and efficiency for AI assisted education.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Integrating large language models into medical undergraduate laboratory course to enhance bioethical competence: a quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnostic performance of large language models on the NEJM image challenge: a comparative study with human evaluators and the impact of prompt engineering.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- A Comparative Study of Five Large Language Models' Response for Liver Cancer Comprehensive Treatment.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Article
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: Research on large language models (LLMs) in the medical field has predominantly focused on models trained with English-language corpora, evaluating their performance within English-speaking contexts. The performances of models trained with non-English language corpora and their performance in non-English contexts remain underexplored. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the performances of LLMs trained on different languages corpora by using the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination (CNMLE) as a benchmark and constructed analogous questions. Methods: Under different prompt settings, we sequentially posed questions to 7 LLMs: 2 primarily trained on English-language corpora and 5 primarily on Chinese-language corpora. The models' responses were compared against standard answers to calculate the accuracy rate of each model. Further subgroup analyses were conducted by categorizing the questions based on various criteria. We also collected error sets to explore patterns of mistakes across different models. Results: Under the zero-shot setting, 6 out of 7 models exceeded the passing level, with the highest accuracy rate achieved by the Chinese LLM Baichuan (86.67%), followed by ChatGPT (83.83%). In the constructed questions, all 7 models exceeded the passing threshold, with Baichuan maintaining the highest accuracy rate (87.00%). In few-shot learning, all models exceeded the passing threshold. Baichuan, ChatGLM, and ChatGPT retained the highest accuracy. While Llama showed marked improvement over previous tests, the relative performance rankings of other models stayed similar to previous results. In subgroup analyses, English models demonstrated comparable or superior performance to Chinese models on questions related to ethics and policy. All models except Llama generally had higher accuracy rates for simple questions than for complex ones. The error set of ChatGPT was similar to those of other Chinese models. Multimodel cross-verification outperformed single model, particularly improving accuracy rate on simple questions. The implementation of dual-model and tri-model verification achieved accuracy rates of 94.17% and 96.33% respectively. Conclusions: At the current level, LLMs trained primarily on English corpora and those trained mainly on Chinese corpora perform similarly well in CNMLE, with Chinese models still outperforming. The performance difference between ChatGPT and other Chinese LLMs are not solely due to communication barriers but are more likely influenced by disparities in the training data. By using a method of cross-verification with multiple LLMs, excellent performance can be achieved in medical examinations.
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.