Abstract:Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have demonstrated the ability to pass standardized exams. These models are not trained for a specific task, but instead trained to predict sequences of text from large corpora of documents sourced from the internet. It has been shown that even models trained on this general task can pass exams in a variety of domain-specific fields, including the United States Medical Licensing Examination. We asked if large language models would perform as well on a much narrower subdomain tests designed for medical specialists. Furthermore, we wanted to better understand how progressive generations of GPT (generative pre-trained transformer) models may be evolving in the completeness and sophistication of their responses even while generational training remains general. In this study, we evaluated the performance of two versions of GPT (GPT 3 and 4) on their ability to pass the certification exam given to physicians to work as osteoporosis specialists and become a certified clinical densitometrists. The CCD exam has a possible score range of 150 to 400. To pass, you need a score of 300. Methods: A 100-question multiple-choice practice exam was obtained from a 3rd party exam preparation website that mimics the accredited certification tests given by the ISCD (International Society for Clinical Densitometry). The exam was administered to two versions of GPT, the free version (GPT Playground) and ChatGPT+, which are based on GPT-3 and GPT-4, respectively (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA). The systems were prompted with the exam questions verbatim. If the response was purely textual and did not specify which of the multiple-choice answers to select, the authors matched the text to the closest answer. Each exam was graded and an estimated ISCD score was provided from the exam website. In addition, each response was evaluated by a rheumatologist CCD and ranked for accuracy using a 5-level scale. The two GPT versions were compared in terms of response accuracy and length. Results: The average response length was 11.6 ±19 words for GPT-3 and 50.0±43.6 words for GPT-4. GPT-3 answered 62 questions correctly resulting in a failing ISCD score of 289. However, GPT-4 answered 82 questions correctly with a passing score of 342. GPT-3 scored highest on the "Overview of Low Bone Mass and Osteoporosis" category (72 % correct) while GPT-4 scored well above 80 % accuracy on all categories except "Imaging Technology in Bone Health" (65 % correct). Regarding subjective accuracy, GPT-3 answered 23 questions with nonsensical or totally wrong responses while GPT-4 had no responses in that category. Conclusion: If this had been an actual certification exam, GPT-4 would now have a CCD suffix to its name even after being trained using general internet knowledge. Clearly, more goes into physician training than can be captured in this exam. However, GPT algorithms may prove to be valuable physician aids in the diagnoses and monitoring of osteoporosis and other diseases.

Comparative analysis of GPT-3.5 and 4.0 in Taiwan's medical technologist certification: A study in AI advancements

Comparative analysis of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.0 in Taiwan's medical technologist certification: A study in artificial intelligence advancements

Performance of Progressive Generations of GPT on an Exam Designed for Certifying Physicians as Certified Clinical Densitometrists

Exploring the proficiency of ChatGPT-4: An evaluation of its performance in the Taiwan advanced medical licensing examination

Performance Assessment of GPT 4.0 on the Japanese Medical Licensing Examination

Performance of GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 in generating accurate and comprehensive diagnoses across medical subspecialties

Custom GPTs Enhancing Performance and Evidence Compared with GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o? A Study on the Emergency Medicine Specialist Examination

Performance Evaluation of the Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT-4) on the Family Medicine In-Training Examination

Comprehensive analysis of the performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the American Urological Association self-assessment study program exams from 2012-2023

Performance of ChatGPT on Stage 1 of the Taiwanese medical licensing exam

The Diagnostic Ability of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.0 in Surgery: Comparative Analysis

Comparative Analysis of GPT-4Vision, GPT-4 and Open Source LLMs in Clinical Diagnostic Accuracy: A Benchmark Against Human Expertise

Influence of Model Evolution and System Roles on ChatGPT's Performance in Chinese Medical Licensing Exams: Comparative Study

Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the Japanese Medical Licensing Examination: Comparison Study

Performance and exploration of ChatGPT in medical examination, records and education in Chinese: Pave the way for medical AI

Performance of ChatGPT Across Different Versions in Medical Licensing Examinations Worldwide: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Assessing GPT-4's Performance in Delivering Medical Advice: Comparative Analysis With Human Experts

Performance Comparison of ChatGPT-4 and Japanese Medical Residents in the General Medicine In-Training Examination: Comparison Study

Capabilities of GPT-4 on Medical Challenge Problems

Performance of generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) in Certification Examination of the College of Family Physicians of Canada

A Systematic Evaluation of GPT-4V's Multimodal Capability for Medical Image Analysis