ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
The temporal changes in GPT-4 performance on UKMLA practice questions: educational and clinical implications.
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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) models, such as GPT-4, have been extensively studied for their integration into medical practice and education. GPT-4 has demonstrated excellent performance on medical licensing examinations, including the United Kingdom Medical Licensing Assessment (UKMLA). However, the field lacks longitudinal data on whether such performance is stable or varies over time. Theoretically, iterative improvements updated by the vendor should enhance performance, but empirical evidence of such longitudinal trends remains limited. Given that GPT-4 undergoes periodic vendor-side updates, we aimed to analyse the categorical, time-spaced performance of GPT-4 on the UKMLA to characterise how its performance changes over time in a medical context. Methods: Two publicly available UKMLA papers were fed into GPT-4 at two different time points, June 2023 and December 2024. 191 questions were provided with and without multiple-choice options to assess GPT-4's clinical competence. McNemar's test was performed to evaluate changes in GPT-4's performance over time, comparing domain-specific questions. Results: GPT-4's accuracy improved noticeably between the two rounds (MCQ: 88.0 to 93.7%, Discussion and conclusion: GPT-4's performance on the UKMLA improved significantly over 18 months, suggesting that iterative vendor-side model updates enhance clinical reasoning capabilities. These findings indicate that GPT-4 may serve as a supplementary educational tool for medical students and clinicians; however, the underlying drivers of performance changes remain opaque, and such tools should be deployed with structured oversight to prevent overreliance.
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.