ChatGPT Versus National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for Postgraduate (NEET PG).
artificial intelligence
chatgpt
machine learning
medical education
neet
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2024
Jun 2024
Historique:
accepted:
24
06
2024
medline:
26
7
2024
pubmed:
26
7
2024
entrez:
25
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Introduction With both suspicion and excitement, artificial intelligence tools are being integrated into nearly every aspect of human existence, including medical sciences and medical education. The newest large language model (LLM) in the class of autoregressive language models is ChatGPT. While ChatGPT's potential to revolutionize clinical practice and medical education is under investigation, further research is necessary to understand its strengths and limitations in this field comprehensively. Methods Two hundred National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for Postgraduate 2023 questions were gathered from various public education websites and individually entered into Microsoft Bing (GPT-4 Version 2.2.1). Microsoft Bing Chatbot is currently the only platform incorporating all of GPT-4's multimodal features, including image recognition. The results were subsequently analyzed. Results Out of 200 questions, ChatGPT-4 answered 129 correctly. The most tested specialties were medicine (15%), obstetrics and gynecology (15%), general surgery (14%), and pathology (10%), respectively. Conclusion This study sheds light on how well the GPT-4 performs in addressing the NEET-PG entrance test. ChatGPT has potential as an adjunctive instrument within medical education and clinical settings. Its capacity to react intelligently and accurately in complicated clinical settings demonstrates its versatility.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39050297
doi: 10.7759/cureus.63048
pmc: PMC11268980
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e63048Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024, Paul et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Human subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve human participants or tissue. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Références
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2024 Jan 20;:
pubmed: 38244054
Indian J Surg. 2022 Apr;84(Suppl 1):275-280
pubmed: 35221586
SN Comput Sci. 2022;3(2):158
pubmed: 35194580
J Acad Ophthalmol (2017). 2023 Sep 11;15(2):e184-e187
pubmed: 37701862
Sci Rep. 2023 Oct 29;13(1):18562
pubmed: 37899405
Cureus. 2023 Sep 21;15(9):e45700
pubmed: 37868408
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jul 17;11(14):
pubmed: 37510487
Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Aug 11;102(32):e34673
pubmed: 37565917
Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 Sep 19;10:1240915
pubmed: 37795422
Crit Care. 2023 Apr 18;27(1):148
pubmed: 37072798
Acta Stomatol Croat. 2023 Mar;57(1):70-84
pubmed: 37288152
Acad Radiol. 2024 Jan;31(1):338-342
pubmed: 37709612
JMIR Med Educ. 2024 Feb 21;10:e51523
pubmed: 38381486
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Mar 03;20(5):
pubmed: 36901550
Semin Diagn Pathol. 2023 Mar;40(2):100-108
pubmed: 36882343
Int J Med Inform. 2023 Sep;177:105173
pubmed: 37549499
JMIR Med Educ. 2023 Feb 8;9:e45312
pubmed: 36753318