Can AI pass the written European Board Examination in Neurological Surgery? - Ethical and practical issues.
Artificial intelligence
Bard
Bing
Board-certification
Chat gpt
EANS
Neurosurgery board examination
Journal
Brain & spine
ISSN: 2772-5294
Titre abrégé: Brain Spine
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9918470888906676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2024
2024
Historique:
received:
27
11
2023
revised:
28
01
2024
accepted:
12
02
2024
medline:
21
3
2024
pubmed:
21
3
2024
entrez:
21
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Artificial intelligence (AI) based large language models (LLM) contain enormous potential in education and training. Recent publications demonstrated that they are able to outperform participants in written medical exams. We aimed to explore the accuracy of AI in the written part of the EANS board exam. Eighty-six representative single best answer (SBA) questions, included at least ten times in prior EANS board exams, were selected by the current EANS board exam committee. The questions' content was classified as 75 text-based (TB) and 11 image-based (IB) and their structure as 50 interpretation-weighted, 30 theory-based and 6 true-or-false. Questions were tested with Chat GPT 3.5, Bing and Bard. The AI and participant results were statistically analyzed through ANOVA tests with Stata SE 15 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). P-values of <0.05 were considered as statistically significant. The Bard LLM achieved the highest accuracy with 62% correct questions overall and 69% excluding IB, outperforming human exam participants 59% (p = 0.67) and 59% (p = 0.42), respectively. All LLMs scored highest in theory-based questions, excluding IB questions (Chat-GPT: 79%; Bing: 83%; Bard: 86%) and significantly better than the human exam participants (60%; p = 0.03). AI could not answer any IB question correctly. AI passed the written EANS board exam based on representative SBA questions and achieved results close to or even better than the human exam participants. Our results raise several ethical and practical implications, which may impact the current concept for the written EANS board exam.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38510593
doi: 10.1016/j.bas.2024.102765
pii: S2772-5294(24)00021-3
pmc: PMC10951784
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
102765Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.