谷歌浏览器插件
订阅小程序
在清言上使用

Is ChatGPT 'ready' to Be a Learning Tool for Medical Undergraduates and Will It Perform Equally in Different Subjects? Comparative Study of ChatGPT Performance in Tutorial and Case-Based Learning Questions in Physiology and Biochemistry.

Medical teacher(2024)

引用 0|浏览9
暂无评分
摘要
PurposeGenerative AI will become an integral part of education in future. The potential of this technology in different disciplines should be identified to promote effective adoption. This study evaluated the performance of ChatGPT in tutorial and case-based learning questions in physiology and biochemistry for medical undergraduates. Our study mainly focused on the performance of GPT-3.5 version while a subgroup was comparatively assessed on GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 performances.Materials and methodsAnswers were generated in GPT-3.5 for 44 modified essay questions (MEQs) in physiology and 43 MEQs in biochemistry. Each answer was graded by two independent examiners. Subsequently, a subset of 15 questions from each subject were selected to represent different score categories of the GPT-3.5 answers; responses were generated in GPT-4, and graded.ResultsThe mean score for physiology answers was 74.7 (SD 25.96). GPT-3.5 demonstrated a statistically significant (p = .009) superior performance in lower-order questions of Bloom's taxonomy in comparison to higher-order questions. Deficiencies in the application of physiological principles in clinical context were noted as a drawback. Scores in biochemistry were relatively lower with a mean score of 59.3 (SD 26.9) for GPT-3.5. There was no statistically significant difference in the scores for higher and lower-order questions of Bloom's taxonomy. The deficiencies highlighted were lack of in-depth explanations and precision. The subset of questions where the GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 were compared demonstrated a better overall performance in GPT-4 responses in both subjects. This difference between the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 performance was statistically significant in biochemistry but not in physiology.ConclusionsThe differences in performance across the two versions, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 across the disciplines are noteworthy. Educators and students should understand the strengths and limitations of this technology in different fields to effectively integrate this technology into teaching and learning.
更多
查看译文
关键词
ChatGPT,GPT-3.5,GPT-4 generative AI (artificial intelligence),LLM (large language model),physiology biochemistry
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要