Chatbot Underperformance in Biology and Image-Based Questions in Medical Education.

Journal of CME Pub Date : 2025-12-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/28338073.2025.2596550
Joyce Santana Rizzi, Lorraine Silva Requena, Angelica Maria Bicudo, Pedro Tadao Hamamoto Filho, Renato Ferretti
{"title":"Chatbot Underperformance in Biology and Image-Based Questions in Medical Education.","authors":"Joyce Santana Rizzi, Lorraine Silva Requena, Angelica Maria Bicudo, Pedro Tadao Hamamoto Filho, Renato Ferretti","doi":"10.1080/28338073.2025.2596550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>AI chatbots have demonstrated variable performances across biological disciplines in medical education, particularly in multiple-choice and image-based assessments. However, their performance in addressing discipline-specific and image-based questions in biology remains unexamined. This study evaluated the accuracy and reliability of chatbots in answering biological questions from the Progress Test, a medical assessment applied across ten universities. We conducted an observational cross-sectional study by inputting 180 questions into the chatbots and categorising them according to morphology, function, and aggression. Each question was assessed for correctness across multiple chatbot attempts, and logistic regression and hierarchical clustering were applied to identify performance patterns. Although the chatbots answered functional and morphological questions accurately (from 85% (Gemini) to 91.7% (ChatGPT-4)), their accuracy decreased significantly for questions involving biological aggression and visual content. The agreement between chatbot responses remained weak, and Co-pilot displayed the lowest concordance. Chatbot accuracy decreased significantly in aggression-related disciplines and image-based questions. Logistic regression confirmed that the presence of images reduced the odds of correct answers by up to 17.6% (ChatGPT-4). Hierarchical clustering distinguished the two distinct response patterns, further validating these findings. These results highlight the potential of chatbots in medical education while emphasising their limitations in handling image-based and aggression-related content.</p>","PeriodicalId":73675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of CME","volume":"14 1","pages":"2596550"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12679838/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of CME","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/28338073.2025.2596550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AI chatbots have demonstrated variable performances across biological disciplines in medical education, particularly in multiple-choice and image-based assessments. However, their performance in addressing discipline-specific and image-based questions in biology remains unexamined. This study evaluated the accuracy and reliability of chatbots in answering biological questions from the Progress Test, a medical assessment applied across ten universities. We conducted an observational cross-sectional study by inputting 180 questions into the chatbots and categorising them according to morphology, function, and aggression. Each question was assessed for correctness across multiple chatbot attempts, and logistic regression and hierarchical clustering were applied to identify performance patterns. Although the chatbots answered functional and morphological questions accurately (from 85% (Gemini) to 91.7% (ChatGPT-4)), their accuracy decreased significantly for questions involving biological aggression and visual content. The agreement between chatbot responses remained weak, and Co-pilot displayed the lowest concordance. Chatbot accuracy decreased significantly in aggression-related disciplines and image-based questions. Logistic regression confirmed that the presence of images reduced the odds of correct answers by up to 17.6% (ChatGPT-4). Hierarchical clustering distinguished the two distinct response patterns, further validating these findings. These results highlight the potential of chatbots in medical education while emphasising their limitations in handling image-based and aggression-related content.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

聊天机器人在生物学和医学教育中基于图像的问题中的表现不佳。
人工智能聊天机器人在医学教育的生物学科中表现出了不同的表现,特别是在多项选择和基于图像的评估中。然而,它们在解决生物学中特定学科和基于图像的问题方面的表现仍未得到检验。这项研究评估了聊天机器人在回答进步测试(Progress Test)中的生物学问题时的准确性和可靠性,这是一项在十所大学应用的医学评估。我们通过向聊天机器人输入180个问题,并根据形态、功能和攻击性对它们进行分类,进行了一项观察性横断面研究。在多个聊天机器人尝试中评估每个问题的正确性,并应用逻辑回归和分层聚类来识别性能模式。尽管聊天机器人准确地回答了功能和形态问题(从85% (Gemini)到91.7% (ChatGPT-4)),但在涉及生物攻击和视觉内容的问题上,它们的准确性显著下降。聊天机器人之间的一致性仍然很弱,副驾驶的一致性最低。聊天机器人在攻击性相关学科和基于图像的问题上的准确性显著下降。逻辑回归证实,图像的存在将正确答案的几率降低了17.6% (ChatGPT-4)。分层聚类区分了两种不同的反应模式,进一步验证了这些发现。这些结果突出了聊天机器人在医学教育中的潜力,同时也强调了它们在处理基于图像和攻击性相关内容方面的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书