ArticleJournal of CME2025
Chatbot Underperformance in Biology and Image-Based Questions in Medical Education.
Article in Journal of CME, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
AI chatbots have demonstrated variable performances across biological disciplines in medical education, particularly in multiple-choice and image-based assessments. However, their performance in addressing discipline-specific and image-based questions in biology remains unexamined. This study evaluated the accuracy and reliability of chatbots in answering biological questions from the Progress Test, a medical assessment applied across ten universities. We conducted an observational cross-sectional study by inputting 180 questions into the chatbots and categorising them according to morphology, function, and aggression. Each question was assessed for correctness across multiple chatbot attempts, and logistic regression and hierarchical clustering were applied to identify performance patterns. Although the chatbots answered functional and morphological questions accurately (from 85% (Gemini) to 91.7% (ChatGPT-4)), their accuracy decreased significantly for questions involving biological aggression and visual content. The agreement between chatbot responses remained weak, and Co-pilot displayed the lowest concordance. Chatbot accuracy decreased significantly in aggression-related disciplines and image-based questions. Logistic regression confirmed that the presence of images reduced the odds of correct answers by up to 17.6% (ChatGPT-4). Hierarchical clustering distinguished the two distinct response patterns, further validating these findings. These results highlight the potential of chatbots in medical education while emphasising their limitations in handling image-based and aggression-related content.
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.