Claims

ChatGPT-4.0 was 36% more likely than ChatGPT-3.5 to provide correct answers across medical licensing and residency exams

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2028: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? The forest plot showed a risk ratio of 1.36 (95% CI 1.30-1.43), indicating ChatGPT-4 was 36% more likely to provide correct answers than ChatGPT-3.5. → Lesselroth Blake 2025

Evidence

Lesselroth Blake 2025

Lesselroth Blake, Riese Janik, Yang Zhichao, Jaleel Shahila, Shabbir Waqas, Jaleel Anila, Aziz Umair, Farid Ghulam, Zahid Bashir Muhammad, Mirza Tehmasp Rehman, Khizar Abbas Syed Mohammad, Aslam Shiraz, Sikander Rana Muhammad Hassaan. (2025). Evaluating the Potential and Accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5 and 4.0 in Medical Licensing and In-Training Examinations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JMIR Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.2196/68070

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analysis across both exam types found "a risk ratio of 1.36 (95% CI 1.30-1.43)" favoring ChatGPT-4 over ChatGPT-3.5. The article prints a risk ratio rather than a standardized effect size, so impact is null.

"The forest plot presented a risk ratio of 1.36 (95% CI 1.30-1.43), demonstrating that ChatGPT-4 was 36% more likely to provide correct answers than ChatGPT-3.5 across both medical licensing and residency exams."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.