ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
A comparative study of the performance of different large language models in the Chinese National Pharmacist Licensing Examination.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
Objective: To systematically evaluate the overall performance, subject-based differences, and question type adaptability of five mainstream large language models (ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Kimi, Qwen, and Doubao) in the Chinese National Pharmacist Licensing Examination (CNPLE), and to explore their feasibility as auxiliary tools for pharmaceutical examinations. Methods: A cross-sectional comparative study design was adopted. The practice questions of the 2024 CNPLE were used as the evaluation dataset, covering 480 standardized questions across four subjects: Pharmaceutical Professional Knowledge (I), Pharmaceutical Professional Knowledge (II), Comprehensive Knowledge and Skills of Pharmacy, and Pharmaceutical Administration and Regulation. The question types included Type A (single best choice), Type B (matching choice), Type C (comprehensive analysis), and Type X (multiple choice). Standardized prompts were used for independent tests using the official web versions of each model with default parameters. Each question was input separately in a new conversation session to avoid contextual interference. Taking the official standard answers as the gold standard, the subject accuracy rate, question type accuracy rate, and overall accuracy rate of each model were calculated. To compare the overall performance among the five models, Cochran's Q test was applied. Results: All five models exceeded the 60% passing score threshold of the CNPLE. The overall accuracy ranking was: Kimi (89.58%) > Doubao (88.96%) > DeepSeek (87.29%) > Qwen (77.92%) > ChatGPT (72.50%). Cochran's Q test showed a statistically significant difference in the overall accuracy among the five models ( Conclusion: In this single-run evaluation, the Chinese large language models tested achieved higher overall accuracy than ChatGPT under the same conditions. Among them, Kimi, Doubao and DeepSeek have reached an excellent performance level. Different models present differentiated advantages across subjects and question types. Regulatory subjects and Type X (multiple-answer) questions are common challenges for all models. The findings indicate that mainstream LLMs possess considerable potential as auxiliary tools for the CNPLE, and can provide intelligent support for pharmaceutical education and examination preparation.
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.