A comparative analysis of the performance of large language models in the basic life support exam: Comprehensive evaluation of ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.0, Claude 3.5, and DeepSeek R1

Aim: Considering the growing role artificial intelligence technologies play in medical education, this study aims to provide a comparative evaluation of the performances of large language models ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.0, Claude 3.5, and DeepSeek R1 in the Basic Life Support (BLS) Exam.Materials and Methods: In this observational study, we presented four large language models with 25 multiple-choice questions based on the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines.Questions were divided into two categories as knowledge-based (n = 14, 56%) and case-based (n = 11, 44%).Response consistency was ensured by presenting each question on three separate days to all models.Models' accuracy rates were assessed using overall accuracy, strict accuracy, and ideal accuracy criteria.Results: In the overall accuracy assessment, ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 models showed 100% success, and Gemini 2.0 and Claude 3.5 models achieved 96% success rate.All models performed perfectly on the case-based questions.On the knowledge-based questions, ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 scored full points, while Gemini 2.0 and Claude 3.5 achieved 90.9% success.Statistical analysis showed no significant difference between results (p = 0.368).Discussion: Large language models show high accuracy rates in BLS training.These technologies can be used in supportive roles in medical education, but human supervision is critical in clinical decision-making.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Annals of Clinical and Analytical Medicine
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4328/acam.22758
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparative analysis of the performance of large language models in the basic life support exam: Comprehensive evaluation of ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.0, Claude 3.5, and DeepSeek R1

Bensu Bulut, Ramazan Kocaaslan, Ramiz Yazıcı, Mustafa Sırrı KOTANOĞLU et al.
The Annals of Clinical and Analytical Medicine
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

A comparative analysis of the performance of large language models in the basic life support exam: Comprehensive evaluation of ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.0, Claude 3.5, and DeepSeek R1

Bensu Bulut, Ramazan Kocaaslan, Ramiz Yazıcı, Mustafa Sırrı KOTANOĞLU, Mehmet Yortanlı, Hüseyin Mutlu, Eray Çınar, Ayşenur Gür, Betül Çiğdem Yortanlı, Murat Genç, Medine Akkan Öz
article en

Abstract

Aim: Considering the growing role artificial intelligence technologies play in medical education, this study aims to provide a comparative evaluation of the performances of large language models ChatGPT-4o, Gemini 2.0, Claude 3.5, and DeepSeek R1 in the Basic Life Support (BLS) Exam.Materials and Methods: In this observational study, we presented four large language models with 25 multiple-choice questions based on the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines.Questions were divided into two categories as knowledge-based (n = 14, 56%) and case-based (n = 11, 44%).Response consistency was ensured by presenting each question on three separate days to all models.Models' accuracy rates were assessed using overall accuracy, strict accuracy, and ideal accuracy criteria.Results: In the overall accuracy assessment, ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 models showed 100% success, and Gemini 2.0 and Claude 3.5 models achieved 96% success rate.All models performed perfectly on the case-based questions.On the knowledge-based questions, ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek R1 scored full points, while Gemini 2.0 and Claude 3.5 achieved 90.9% success.Statistical analysis showed no significant difference between results (p = 0.368).Discussion: Large language models show high accuracy rates in BLS training.These technologies can be used in supportive roles in medical education, but human supervision is critical in clinical decision-making.

The Annals of Clinical and Analytical MedicineVol. 16(07)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 87%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.