Evaluation of large Language model performance on Persian rheumatology board exams: accuracy and clinical reasoning of GPT-4o vs. GPT-5.1

Large language models are increasingly integrated into medical education, yet their performance in non-English clinical examinations, particularly Persian, remains limited. This study evaluated how GPT-4o and GPT-5.1 perform on Iranian Rheumatology Board examination questions. A total of 204 multiple-choice items were administered in Persian using a similar prompt. Accuracy was determined using the official answer key, and six board-certified rheumatologists independently scored each model’s clinical reasoning on a 1–5 scale. GPT-5.1 demonstrated markedly superior performance, achieving 76% accuracy compared with 64.5% for GPT-4o, alongside significantly higher reasoning scores. Unlike GPT-4o, which showed considerable variability across question types, GPT-5.1 performed consistently across basic science, clinical scenarios, diagnosis, and treatment domains. Although inter-rater agreement among rheumatologists was modest, it remained statistically significant. These findings suggest that newer-generation LLMs provide more reliable reasoning and accuracy in Persian medical assessments. Nevertheless, despite their promising role as educational aids, current models are not yet suitable for high-stakes clinical decision-making and require continued evaluation across diverse languages and specialties.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38716-z
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of large Language model performance on Persian rheumatology board exams: accuracy and clinical reasoning of GPT-4o vs. GPT-5.1

Maryam Loghman, Hamidreza Soltani, Bita Shadbakht, Saina Sadeghipour et al.
Scientific Reports
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

Evaluation of large Language model performance on Persian rheumatology board exams: accuracy and clinical reasoning of GPT-4o vs. GPT-5.1

Maryam Loghman, Hamidreza Soltani, Bita Shadbakht, Saina Sadeghipour, Shahab Sheikhalishahi, Farzad Rafiei, Ehsan Rahmanian, Hamidreza Bashiri, Leyla Bagheri
article en

Abstract

Large language models are increasingly integrated into medical education, yet their performance in non-English clinical examinations, particularly Persian, remains limited. This study evaluated how GPT-4o and GPT-5.1 perform on Iranian Rheumatology Board examination questions. A total of 204 multiple-choice items were administered in Persian using a similar prompt. Accuracy was determined using the official answer key, and six board-certified rheumatologists independently scored each model’s clinical reasoning on a 1–5 scale. GPT-5.1 demonstrated markedly superior performance, achieving 76% accuracy compared with 64.5% for GPT-4o, alongside significantly higher reasoning scores. Unlike GPT-4o, which showed considerable variability across question types, GPT-5.1 performed consistently across basic science, clinical scenarios, diagnosis, and treatment domains. Although inter-rater agreement among rheumatologists was modest, it remained statistically significant. These findings suggest that newer-generation LLMs provide more reliable reasoning and accuracy in Persian medical assessments. Nevertheless, despite their promising role as educational aids, current models are not yet suitable for high-stakes clinical decision-making and require continued evaluation across diverse languages and specialties.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Iran University of Medical Sciences (IR), Kashan University of Medical Sciences (IR), Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences and Health Services (IR), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (IR)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
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.