The performance of <scp>ChatGPT</scp> and other large language models on multiple‐choice questions in biomedical disciplines: A meta‐analysis

While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise as learning tools for medical education, their reported accuracy on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) varies widely across studies, necessitating synthesis. This meta-analysis synthesizes LLM accuracy on text-based MCQs from biomedical disciplines and USMLE Step 1-level content and explores study characteristics that moderate LLM performance. Studies published between January 1, 2022, and August 5, 2025, were identified using seven databases. Titles and abstracts were screened against eligibility criteria, which included testing LLM performance on text-based MCQs in English. Extracted data included accuracy rates (correct responses/total questions) and study characteristics. A random-effects proportional meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled accuracy of LLM versions across studies, and a meta-regression tested the effects of study characteristics on accuracy. The final analysis included 41 articles comprising 207 proportions. Newer OpenAI models (GPT-4o through GPT o1 = 90%; GPT-4 = 82%) demonstrated significantly higher accuracy than earlier versions (GPT-3/3.5 = 59%; p < 0.001). Model version explained 56% of the total variance (p < 0.001). The pooled accuracy of newer Anthropic (Claude 3 through 3.7 = 86%) and DeepSeek (R1 = 86%) versions fell within the range of performance for the newer OpenAI versions, while newer Google (Gemini series = 76%) and Microsoft (Copilot = 69%) versions demonstrated lower performance. A discipline-level analysis demonstrated that OpenAI's GPT-4 through GPT-o1 models achieved pooled accuracy rates between 83 and 87% for most disciplines, including the anatomical sciences. These findings demonstrate that newer LLMs are achieving higher accuracy than older models on biomedical and Step 1-level MCQs, supporting their potential integration as supplementary study tools in foundational biomedical education.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Anatomical Sciences Education
Published
2026-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.70262
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

The performance of ChatGPT and other large language models on multiple‐choice questions in biomedical disciplines: A meta‐analysis

Anatomical Sciences Education
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

The performance of ChatGPT and other large language models on multiple‐choice questions in biomedical disciplines: A meta‐analysis

article en

Abstract

While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise as learning tools for medical education, their reported accuracy on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) varies widely across studies, necessitating synthesis. This meta-analysis synthesizes LLM accuracy on text-based MCQs from biomedical disciplines and USMLE Step 1-level content and explores study characteristics that moderate LLM performance. Studies published between January 1, 2022, and August 5, 2025, were identified using seven databases. Titles and abstracts were screened against eligibility criteria, which included testing LLM performance on text-based MCQs in English. Extracted data included accuracy rates (correct responses/total questions) and study characteristics. A random-effects proportional meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled accuracy of LLM versions across studies, and a meta-regression tested the effects of study characteristics on accuracy. The final analysis included 41 articles comprising 207 proportions. Newer OpenAI models (GPT-4o through GPT o1 = 90%; GPT-4 = 82%) demonstrated significantly higher accuracy than earlier versions (GPT-3/3.5 = 59%; p < 0.001). Model version explained 56% of the total variance (p < 0.001). The pooled accuracy of newer Anthropic (Claude 3 through 3.7 = 86%) and DeepSeek (R1 = 86%) versions fell within the range of performance for the newer OpenAI versions, while newer Google (Gemini series = 76%) and Microsoft (Copilot = 69%) versions demonstrated lower performance. A discipline-level analysis demonstrated that OpenAI's GPT-4 through GPT-o1 models achieved pooled accuracy rates between 83 and 87% for most disciplines, including the anatomical sciences. These findings demonstrate that newer LLMs are achieving higher accuracy than older models on biomedical and Step 1-level MCQs, supporting their potential integration as supplementary study tools in foundational biomedical education.

Anatomical Sciences Education
Louisiana State University (US), Tufts University (US), Regis University (US), Rush University Medical Center (US), Tufts Medical Center (US), Alfaisal University (SA), Illinois College (US), George Washington University (US), University of Washington (US), University Medical Center New Orleans (US), University of Alabama at Birmingham (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US), Indiana University Fort Wayne (US), Indiana University School of Medicine, Rush University (US), University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US), Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US), Monash University (AU), Indiana University (US), Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans (US), Point Loma Nazarene University (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
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.