Evaluating the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination

This study aims to compare and evaluate the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the 2020 and 2021 Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination (NMLE), exploring their potential value in medical education and clinical applications. Six hundred original test questions from the 2020 and 2021 NMLE (covering five types of questions) were selected and input into GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o for response. The accuracy of the models across different question types and units was recorded and analyzed. Statistical methods were employed to compare the performance differences among the three models. GPT-4o demonstrated significantly higher overall accuracy than GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 (P < 0.001). In the 2020 and 2021 exams, GPT-4o achieved accuracy rates of 84.2% and 88.2%, respectively, with the highest accuracy observed in questions related to the digestive system (Unit 3), reaching 94.75%. GPT-4 showed moderate performance, while GPT - 3.5 had the lowest accuracy. Additionally, GPT-4o exhibited a clear advantage in complex question formats, such as case analysis questions (A3/A4 type) and standard matching questions (B1 type). GPT-4o outperformed its predecessors in the NMLE, demonstrating exceptional comprehension and problem-solving abilities in non-English medical examinations. This study provides important insights into the application and promotion of generative AI in medical education and clinical practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-04-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98949-2
Citations
20
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.09
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination

Yulian Liu, Mengke Liu, Qiang Gao, Dingyuan Luo et al.
20 citations
Scientific Reports
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
13.09
article

Evaluating the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination

Yulian Liu, Mengke Liu, Qiang Gao, Dingyuan Luo, Naifeng Kuang, Qi Fan, Wenjun Jiang, Runyuan Yu, Tao Yin, Zuncheng Zheng
article en
20 citations

Abstract

This study aims to compare and evaluate the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the 2020 and 2021 Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination (NMLE), exploring their potential value in medical education and clinical applications. Six hundred original test questions from the 2020 and 2021 NMLE (covering five types of questions) were selected and input into GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o for response. The accuracy of the models across different question types and units was recorded and analyzed. Statistical methods were employed to compare the performance differences among the three models. GPT-4o demonstrated significantly higher overall accuracy than GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 (P < 0.001). In the 2020 and 2021 exams, GPT-4o achieved accuracy rates of 84.2% and 88.2%, respectively, with the highest accuracy observed in questions related to the digestive system (Unit 3), reaching 94.75%. GPT-4 showed moderate performance, while GPT - 3.5 had the lowest accuracy. Additionally, GPT-4o exhibited a clear advantage in complex question formats, such as case analysis questions (A3/A4 type) and standard matching questions (B1 type). GPT-4o outperformed its predecessors in the NMLE, demonstrating exceptional comprehension and problem-solving abilities in non-English medical examinations. This study provides important insights into the application and promotion of generative AI in medical education and clinical practice.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Shandong Provincial Hospital (CN), Shandong First Medical University (CN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
13.09
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Evaluating the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o in the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination — Yulian Liu, Mengke Liu, et al. · Scientific Reports (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS