Claims

ChatGPT models achieve a pooled accuracy of 70.1% on national health licensing examinations

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2027: 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? Across 23 studies of national licensing examinations, the overall pooled accuracy of ChatGPT models was 70.1% (95% CI, 65.0-74.8%). → Jin Hye Kyung 2024

Evidence

Jin Hye Kyung 2024

Jin Hye Kyung, Lee Ha Eun, Kim EunYoung. (2024). Performance of ChatGPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in national licensing examinations for medicine, pharmacy, dentistry, and nursing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05944-8

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects meta-analysis of 23 studies (144 effect sizes) of ChatGPT-3.5 and GPT-4 accuracy on national licensing examinations in medicine, pharmacy, dentistry, and nursing. The pooled estimate was "70.1% (95% CI, 65.0-74.8%)"; heterogeneity was high (Q = 1201.303, I2 = 98.2%).

"The overall effect size for the percentage of performance of ChatGPT models was 70.1% (95% CI, 65.0-74.8%)."

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.