{"title":"评估增强放射学专业检查的大型语言模型:与人类表现的比较研究。","authors":"Hao-Yun Liu, Shyh-Jye Chen, Weichung Wang, Chung-Hsi Lee, Hsian-He Hsu, Shu-Huei Shen, Hong-Jen Chiou, Wen-Jeng Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.acra.2025.05.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale and objectives: </strong>The radiology specialty examination assesses clinical decision-making, image interpretation, and diagnostic reasoning. With the expansion of medical knowledge, traditional test design faces challenges in maintaining accuracy and relevance. Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate potential in medical education. This study evaluates LLM performance in radiology specialty exams, explores their role in assessing question difficulty, and investigates their reasoning processes, aiming to develop a more objective and efficient framework for exam design.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study compared the performance of LLMs and human examinees in a radiology specialty examination. Three LLMs (GPT-4o, o1-preview, and GPT-3.5-turbo-1106) were evaluated under zero-shot conditions. Exam accuracy, examinee accuracy, discrimination index, and point-biserial correlation were used to assess LLMs' ability to predict question difficulty and reasoning processes. The data provided by the Taiwan Radiological Society ensures comparability between AI and human performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As for accuracy, GPT-4o (88.0%) and o1-preview (90.9%) outperformed human examinees (76.3%), whereas GPT-3.5-turbo-1106 showed significantly lower accuracy (50.2%). Question difficulty analysis revealed that newer LLMs excel in solving complex questions, while GPT-3.5-turbo-1106 exhibited greater performance variability. Discrimination index and point-biserial Correlation analyses demonstrated that GPT-4o and o1-preview accurately identified key differentiating questions, closely mirroring human reasoning patterns. These findings suggest that advanced LLMs can assess medical examination difficulty, offering potential applications in exam standardization and question evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study evaluated the problem-solving capabilities of GPT-3.5-turbo-1106, GPT-4o, and o1-preview in a radiology specialty examination. LLMs should be utilized as tools for assessing exam question difficulty and assisting in the standardized development of medical examinations.</p>","PeriodicalId":50928,"journal":{"name":"Academic Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Large Language Models for Enhancing Radiology Specialty Examination: A Comparative Study with Human Performance.\",\"authors\":\"Hao-Yun Liu, Shyh-Jye Chen, Weichung Wang, Chung-Hsi Lee, Hsian-He Hsu, Shu-Huei Shen, Hong-Jen Chiou, Wen-Jeng Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acra.2025.05.023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale and objectives: </strong>The radiology specialty examination assesses clinical decision-making, image interpretation, and diagnostic reasoning. With the expansion of medical knowledge, traditional test design faces challenges in maintaining accuracy and relevance. Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate potential in medical education. This study evaluates LLM performance in radiology specialty exams, explores their role in assessing question difficulty, and investigates their reasoning processes, aiming to develop a more objective and efficient framework for exam design.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study compared the performance of LLMs and human examinees in a radiology specialty examination. Three LLMs (GPT-4o, o1-preview, and GPT-3.5-turbo-1106) were evaluated under zero-shot conditions. Exam accuracy, examinee accuracy, discrimination index, and point-biserial correlation were used to assess LLMs' ability to predict question difficulty and reasoning processes. The data provided by the Taiwan Radiological Society ensures comparability between AI and human performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As for accuracy, GPT-4o (88.0%) and o1-preview (90.9%) outperformed human examinees (76.3%), whereas GPT-3.5-turbo-1106 showed significantly lower accuracy (50.2%). Question difficulty analysis revealed that newer LLMs excel in solving complex questions, while GPT-3.5-turbo-1106 exhibited greater performance variability. Discrimination index and point-biserial Correlation analyses demonstrated that GPT-4o and o1-preview accurately identified key differentiating questions, closely mirroring human reasoning patterns. These findings suggest that advanced LLMs can assess medical examination difficulty, offering potential applications in exam standardization and question evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study evaluated the problem-solving capabilities of GPT-3.5-turbo-1106, GPT-4o, and o1-preview in a radiology specialty examination. LLMs should be utilized as tools for assessing exam question difficulty and assisting in the standardized development of medical examinations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2025.05.023\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2025.05.023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating Large Language Models for Enhancing Radiology Specialty Examination: A Comparative Study with Human Performance.
Rationale and objectives: The radiology specialty examination assesses clinical decision-making, image interpretation, and diagnostic reasoning. With the expansion of medical knowledge, traditional test design faces challenges in maintaining accuracy and relevance. Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate potential in medical education. This study evaluates LLM performance in radiology specialty exams, explores their role in assessing question difficulty, and investigates their reasoning processes, aiming to develop a more objective and efficient framework for exam design.
Materials and methods: This study compared the performance of LLMs and human examinees in a radiology specialty examination. Three LLMs (GPT-4o, o1-preview, and GPT-3.5-turbo-1106) were evaluated under zero-shot conditions. Exam accuracy, examinee accuracy, discrimination index, and point-biserial correlation were used to assess LLMs' ability to predict question difficulty and reasoning processes. The data provided by the Taiwan Radiological Society ensures comparability between AI and human performance.
Results: As for accuracy, GPT-4o (88.0%) and o1-preview (90.9%) outperformed human examinees (76.3%), whereas GPT-3.5-turbo-1106 showed significantly lower accuracy (50.2%). Question difficulty analysis revealed that newer LLMs excel in solving complex questions, while GPT-3.5-turbo-1106 exhibited greater performance variability. Discrimination index and point-biserial Correlation analyses demonstrated that GPT-4o and o1-preview accurately identified key differentiating questions, closely mirroring human reasoning patterns. These findings suggest that advanced LLMs can assess medical examination difficulty, offering potential applications in exam standardization and question evaluation.
Conclusion: This study evaluated the problem-solving capabilities of GPT-3.5-turbo-1106, GPT-4o, and o1-preview in a radiology specialty examination. LLMs should be utilized as tools for assessing exam question difficulty and assisting in the standardized development of medical examinations.
期刊介绍:
Academic Radiology publishes original reports of clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, image-guided interventions and related techniques. It also includes brief technical reports describing original observations, techniques, and instrumental developments; state-of-the-art reports on clinical issues, new technology and other topics of current medical importance; meta-analyses; scientific studies and opinions on radiologic education; and letters to the Editor.