Abstract
Background The ChatGPT, a Large-scale language models-based Artificial intelligence (AI), has fueled interest in medical care. However, the ability of AI to understand and generate text is constrained by the quality and quantity of training data available for that language. This study aims to provide qualitative feedback on ChatGPT’s problem-solving capabilities in medical education and clinical decisionmaking in Chinese.
Methods A dataset of Clinical Medicine Entrance Examination for Chinese Postgraduate was used to assess the effectiveness of ChatGPT3.5 in medical knowledge in Chinese language. The indictor of accuracy, concordance (explaining affirms the answer) and frequency of insights was used to assess performance of ChatGPT in original and encoding medical questions.
Result According to our evaluation, ChatGPT received a score of 153.5/300 for original questions in Chinese, which is slightly above the passing threshold of 129/300. Additionally, ChatGPT showed low accuracy in answering open-ended medical questions, with total accuracy of 31.5%. While ChatGPT demonstrated a commendable level of concordance (achieving 90% concordance across all questions) and generated innovative insights for most problems (at least one significant insight for 80% of all questions).
Conclusion ChatGPT’s performance was suboptimal for medical education and clinical decision-making in Chinese compared with in English. However, ChatGPT demonstrated high internal concordance and generated multiple insights in Chinese language. Further research should investigate language-based differences in ChatGPT’s healthcare performance.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Co-first author
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
