ArticleAnatomical sciences education2026
Performance of multimodal large language models on image-based surgical anatomy, anatomical pathology, and radiology questions.
Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multimodal large language models (LLMs) are now deeply integrated into medical education and widely used by medical students, yet it remains unclear whether current models possess the accuracy and reliability needed to support image-based learning. We evaluated four state-of-the-art multimodal LLMs (ChatGPT-5.1, Gemini-2.5, Grok-4, Claude Sonnet-4.5) on 208 image-based examination questions from a Doctor of Medicine program, spanning anatomical pathology (histopathology; 47.6%), radiology (31.7%), and surgical anatomy (20.7%). To isolate visual reasoning, all items were presented in image-only form with contextual information removed. Items covered seven organ systems, included both constructed-response and selected-response formats, and were categorized as recognition-only or recognition-plus-reasoning. ChatGPT-5.1 achieved the highest accuracy (75.5%; 95% CI [69.2-80.8]), followed by Gemini-2.5 (59.6%; 95% CI [52.8-66.1]), Claude Sonnet-4.5 (41.8%; 95% CI [35.3-48.6]), and Grok-4 (34.6%; 95% CI [28.5-41.3]). Overall model performance differed significantly (p < 0.001; Cramér's V = 0.45). Pairwise McNemar comparisons showed significant differences between ChatGPT-5.1 and all other models (all p < 0.001; effect sizes 15.9-40.9 percentage points). Subgroup analyses demonstrated a consistent hierarchy (ChatGPT > Gemini > Claude ≈ Grok) across different categories. Accuracy was uniformly higher for recognition-only and selected-response items. Even the best-performing model, ChatGPT-5.1, answered approximately one in four questions incorrectly. These findings suggest that current multimodal LLMs cannot yet replace expert teaching in image-based learning. Their use in medical education should therefore remain supervised and critically appraised, serving as adjuncts rather than authoritative sources.
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.