Can ChatGPT generate surgical multiple-choice questions comparable to those written by a surgeon?

Q3 Medicine
Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings Pub Date : 2024-10-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/08998280.2024.2418752
Yavuz Selim Kıyak, Ali Kağan Coşkun, Şahin Kaymak, Özlem Coşkun, Işıl İrem Budakoğlu
{"title":"Can ChatGPT generate surgical multiple-choice questions comparable to those written by a surgeon?","authors":"Yavuz Selim Kıyak, Ali Kağan Coşkun, Şahin Kaymak, Özlem Coşkun, Işıl İrem Budakoğlu","doi":"10.1080/08998280.2024.2418752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to determine whether surgical multiple-choice questions generated by ChatGPT are comparable to those written by human experts (surgeons).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was conducted at a medical school and involved 112 fourth-year medical students. Based on five learning objectives in general surgery (colorectal, gastric, trauma, breast, thyroid), ChatGPT and surgeons generated five multiple-choice questions. No change was made to the ChatGPT-generated questions. The statistical properties of these questions, including correlations between two group of questions and correlations with total scores (item discrimination) in a general surgery clerkship exam, were reported.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was a significant positive correlation between the ChatGPT-generated and human-written questions for one learning objective (colorectal). More importantly, only one ChatGPT-generated question (colorectal) achieved an acceptable discrimination level, while other four failed to achieve it. In contrast, human-written questions showed acceptable discrimination levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While ChatGPT has the potential to generate multiple-choice questions comparable to human-written ones in specific contexts, the variability across surgical topics points to the need for human oversight and review before their use in exams. It is important to integrate artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT with human expertise to enhance efficiency and quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":8828,"journal":{"name":"Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings","volume":"38 1","pages":"48-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11657069/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2024.2418752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to determine whether surgical multiple-choice questions generated by ChatGPT are comparable to those written by human experts (surgeons).

Methods: The study was conducted at a medical school and involved 112 fourth-year medical students. Based on five learning objectives in general surgery (colorectal, gastric, trauma, breast, thyroid), ChatGPT and surgeons generated five multiple-choice questions. No change was made to the ChatGPT-generated questions. The statistical properties of these questions, including correlations between two group of questions and correlations with total scores (item discrimination) in a general surgery clerkship exam, were reported.

Results: There was a significant positive correlation between the ChatGPT-generated and human-written questions for one learning objective (colorectal). More importantly, only one ChatGPT-generated question (colorectal) achieved an acceptable discrimination level, while other four failed to achieve it. In contrast, human-written questions showed acceptable discrimination levels.

Conclusion: While ChatGPT has the potential to generate multiple-choice questions comparable to human-written ones in specific contexts, the variability across surgical topics points to the need for human oversight and review before their use in exams. It is important to integrate artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT with human expertise to enhance efficiency and quality.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
245
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信