Evaluating the Effectiveness of advanced large language models in medical Knowledge: A Comparative study using Japanese national medical examination.

Study aims and objectives. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of medical knowledge in the most advanced LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4, Gemini 1.5 Pro, and Claude 3 Opus) as of 2024. It is the first to evaluate these LLMs using a non-English medical licensing exam. The insights from this study will guide educators, policymakers, and technical experts in the effective use of AI in medical education and clinical diagnosis. Authors inputted 790 questions from Japanese National Medical Examination into the chat windows of the LLMs to obtain responses. Two authors independently assessed the correctness. Authors analyzed the overall accuracy rates of the LLMs and compared their performance on image and non-image questions, questions of varying difficulty levels, general and clinical questions, and questions from different medical specialties. Additionally, authors examined the correlation between the number of publications and LLMs' performance in different medical specialties. GPT-4o achieved highest accuracy rate of 89.2% and outperformed the other LLMs in overall performance and each specific category. All four LLMs performed better on non-image questions than image questions, with a 10% accuracy gap. They also performed better on easy questions compared to normal and difficult ones. GPT-4o achieved a 95.0% accuracy rate on easy questions, marking it as an effective knowledge source for medical education. Four LLMs performed worst on "Gastroenterology and Hepatology" specialty. There was a positive correlation between the number of publications and LLM performance in different specialties. GPT-4o achieved an overall accuracy rate close to 90%, with 95.0% on easy questions, significantly outperforming the other LLMs. This indicates GPT-4o's potential as a knowledge source for easy questions. Image-based questions and question difficulty significantly impact LLM accuracy. "Gastroenterology and Hepatology" is the specialty with the lowest performance. The LLMs' performance across medical specialties correlates positively with the number of related publications.

Liu M ，Okuhara T ，Dai Z ，Huang W ，Gu L ，Okada H ，Furukawa E ，Kiuchi T ... -  《-》

Evaluating Bard Gemini Pro and GPT-4 Vision Against Student Performance in Medical Visual Question Answering: Comparative Case Study.

The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI's ChatGPT has significantly impacted medical research and education. These models have shown potential in fields ranging from radiological imaging interpretation to medical licensing examination assistance. Recently, LLMs have been enhanced with image recognition capabilities. This study aims to critically examine the effectiveness of these LLMs in medical diagnostics and training by assessing their accuracy and utility in answering image-based questions from medical licensing examinations. This study analyzed 1070 image-based multiple-choice questions from the AMBOSS learning platform, divided into 605 in English and 465 in German. Customized prompts in both languages directed the models to interpret medical images and provide the most likely diagnosis. Student performance data were obtained from AMBOSS, including metrics such as the "student passed mean" and "majority vote." Statistical analysis was conducted using Python (Python Software Foundation), with key libraries for data manipulation and visualization. GPT-4 1106 Vision Preview (OpenAI) outperformed Bard Gemini Pro (Google), correctly answering 56.9% (609/1070) of questions compared to Bard's 44.6% (477/1070), a statistically significant difference (χ2₁=32.1, P<.001). However, GPT-4 1106 left 16.1% (172/1070) of questions unanswered, significantly higher than Bard's 4.1% (44/1070; χ2₁=83.1, P<.001). When considering only answered questions, GPT-4 1106's accuracy increased to 67.8% (609/898), surpassing both Bard (477/1026, 46.5%; χ2₁=87.7, P<.001) and the student passed mean of 63% (674/1070, SE 1.48%; χ2₁=4.8, P=.03). Language-specific analysis revealed both models performed better in German than English, with GPT-4 1106 showing greater accuracy in German (282/465, 60.65% vs 327/605, 54.1%; χ2₁=4.4, P=.04) and Bard Gemini Pro exhibiting a similar trend (255/465, 54.8% vs 222/605, 36.7%; χ2₁=34.3, P<.001). The student majority vote achieved an overall accuracy of 94.5% (1011/1070), significantly outperforming both artificial intelligence models (GPT-4 1106: χ2₁=408.5, P<.001; Bard Gemini Pro: χ2₁=626.6, P<.001). Our study shows that GPT-4 1106 Vision Preview and Bard Gemini Pro have potential in medical visual question-answering tasks and to serve as a support for students. However, their performance varies depending on the language used, with a preference for German. They also have limitations in responding to non-English content. The accuracy rates, particularly when compared to student responses, highlight the potential of these models in medical education, yet the need for further optimization and understanding of their limitations in diverse linguistic contexts remains critical.

Roos J ，Martin R ，Kaczmarczyk R 《-》

ChatGPT-4 Omni Performance in USMLE Disciplines and Clinical Skills: Comparative Analysis.

Recent studies, including those by the National Board of Medical Examiners, have highlighted the remarkable capabilities of recent large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT in passing the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE). However, there is a gap in detailed analysis of LLM performance in specific medical content areas, thus limiting an assessment of their potential utility in medical education. This study aimed to assess and compare the accuracy of successive ChatGPT versions (GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4 Omni) in USMLE disciplines, clinical clerkships, and the clinical skills of diagnostics and management. This study used 750 clinical vignette-based multiple-choice questions to characterize the performance of successive ChatGPT versions (ChatGPT 3.5 [GPT-3.5], ChatGPT 4 [GPT-4], and ChatGPT 4 Omni [GPT-4o]) across USMLE disciplines, clinical clerkships, and in clinical skills (diagnostics and management). Accuracy was assessed using a standardized protocol, with statistical analyses conducted to compare the models' performances. GPT-4o achieved the highest accuracy across 750 multiple-choice questions at 90.4%, outperforming GPT-4 and GPT-3.5, which scored 81.1% and 60.0%, respectively. GPT-4o's highest performances were in social sciences (95.5%), behavioral and neuroscience (94.2%), and pharmacology (93.2%). In clinical skills, GPT-4o's diagnostic accuracy was 92.7% and management accuracy was 88.8%, significantly higher than its predecessors. Notably, both GPT-4o and GPT-4 significantly outperformed the medical student average accuracy of 59.3% (95% CI 58.3-60.3). GPT-4o's performance in USMLE disciplines, clinical clerkships, and clinical skills indicates substantial improvements over its predecessors, suggesting significant potential for the use of this technology as an educational aid for medical students. These findings underscore the need for careful consideration when integrating LLMs into medical education, emphasizing the importance of structured curricula to guide their appropriate use and the need for ongoing critical analyses to ensure their reliability and effectiveness.

Bicknell BT ，Butler D ，Whalen S ，Ricks J ，Dixon CJ ，Clark AB ，Spaedy O ，Skelton A ，Edupuganti N ，Dzubinski L ，Tate H ，Dyess G ，Lindeman B ，Lehmann LS ... -  《-》

Large Language Models in Worldwide Medical Exams: Platform Development and Comprehensive Analysis.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into medical education, with transformative potential for learning and assessment. However, their performance across diverse medical exams globally has remained underexplored. This study aims to introduce MedExamLLM, a comprehensive platform designed to systematically evaluate the performance of LLMs on medical exams worldwide. Specifically, the platform seeks to (1) compile and curate performance data for diverse LLMs on worldwide medical exams; (2) analyze trends and disparities in LLM capabilities across geographic regions, languages, and contexts; and (3) provide a resource for researchers, educators, and developers to explore and advance the integration of artificial intelligence in medical education. A systematic search was conducted on April 25, 2024, in the PubMed database to identify relevant publications. Inclusion criteria encompassed peer-reviewed, English-language, original research articles that evaluated at least one LLM on medical exams. Exclusion criteria included review articles, non-English publications, preprints, and studies without relevant data on LLM performance. The screening process for candidate publications was independently conducted by 2 researchers to ensure accuracy and reliability. Data, including exam information, data process information, model performance, data availability, and references, were manually curated, standardized, and organized. These curated data were integrated into the MedExamLLM platform, enabling its functionality to visualize and analyze LLM performance across geographic, linguistic, and exam characteristics. The web platform was developed with a focus on accessibility, interactivity, and scalability to support continuous data updates and user engagement. A total of 193 articles were included for final analysis. MedExamLLM comprised information for 16 LLMs on 198 medical exams conducted in 28 countries across 15 languages from the year 2009 to the year 2023. The United States accounted for the highest number of medical exams and related publications, with English being the dominant language used in these exams. The Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) series models, especially GPT-4, demonstrated superior performance, achieving pass rates significantly higher than other LLMs. The analysis revealed significant variability in the capabilities of LLMs across different geographic and linguistic contexts. MedExamLLM is an open-source, freely accessible, and publicly available online platform providing comprehensive performance evaluation information and evidence knowledge about LLMs on medical exams around the world. The MedExamLLM platform serves as a valuable resource for educators, researchers, and developers in the fields of clinical medicine and artificial intelligence. By synthesizing evidence on LLM capabilities, the platform provides valuable insights to support the integration of artificial intelligence into medical education. Limitations include potential biases in the data source and the exclusion of non-English literature. Future research should address these gaps and explore methods to enhance LLM performance in diverse contexts.

Zong H ，Wu R ，Cha J ，Wang J ，Wu E ，Li J ，Zhou Y ，Zhang C ，Feng W ，Shen B ... -  《JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH》

Large Language Models and Empathy: Systematic Review.

Empathy, a fundamental aspect of human interaction, is characterized as the ability to experience another being's emotions within oneself. In health care, empathy is a fundamental for health care professionals and patients' interaction. It is a unique quality to humans that large language models (LLMs) are believed to lack. We aimed to review the literature on the capacity of LLMs in demonstrating empathy. We conducted a literature search on MEDLINE, Google Scholar, PsyArXiv, medRxiv, and arXiv between December 2022 and February 2024. We included English-language full-length publications that evaluated empathy in LLMs' outputs. We excluded papers evaluating other topics related to emotional intelligence that were not specifically empathy. The included studies' results, including the LLMs used, performance in empathy tasks, and limitations of the models, along with studies' metadata were summarized. A total of 12 studies published in 2023 met the inclusion criteria. ChatGPT-3.5 (OpenAI) was evaluated in all studies, with 6 studies comparing it with other LLMs such GPT-4, LLaMA (Meta), and fine-tuned chatbots. Seven studies focused on empathy within a medical context. The studies reported LLMs to exhibit elements of empathy, including emotions recognition and emotional support in diverse contexts. Evaluation metric included automatic metrics such as Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation and Bilingual Evaluation Understudy, and human subjective evaluation. Some studies compared performance on empathy with humans, while others compared between different models. In some cases, LLMs were observed to outperform humans in empathy-related tasks. For example, ChatGPT-3.5 was evaluated for its responses to patients' questions from social media, where ChatGPT's responses were preferred over those of humans in 78.6% of cases. Other studies used subjective readers' assigned scores. One study reported a mean empathy score of 1.84-1.9 (scale 0-2) for their fine-tuned LLM, while a different study evaluating ChatGPT-based chatbots reported a mean human rating of 3.43 out of 4 for empathetic responses. Other evaluations were based on the level of the emotional awareness scale, which was reported to be higher for ChatGPT-3.5 than for humans. Another study evaluated ChatGPT and GPT-4 on soft-skills questions in the United States Medical Licensing Examination, where GPT-4 answered 90% of questions correctly. Limitations were noted, including repetitive use of empathic phrases, difficulty following initial instructions, overly lengthy responses, sensitivity to prompts, and overall subjective evaluation metrics influenced by the evaluator's background. LLMs exhibit elements of cognitive empathy, recognizing emotions and providing emotionally supportive responses in various contexts. Since social skills are an integral part of intelligence, these advancements bring LLMs closer to human-like interactions and expand their potential use in applications requiring emotional intelligence. However, there remains room for improvement in both the performance of these models and the evaluation strategies used for assessing soft skills.

Sorin V ，Brin D ，Barash Y ，Konen E ，Charney A ，Nadkarni G ，Klang E ... -  《JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH》