To evaluate the response capabilities, in a public healthcare system otolaryngology job competition examination, of ChatGPT 3.5 and an internet-connected GPT-4 engine (Microsoft Copilot) with the real scores of otolaryngology specialists as the control group. In September 2023, 135 questions divided into theoretical and practical parts were input into ChatGPT 3.5 and an internet-connected GPT-4. The accuracy of AI responses was compared with the official results from otolaryngologists who took the exam, and statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 14.2. Copilot (GPT-4) outperformed ChatGPT 3.5. Copilot achieved a score of 88.5 points, while ChatGPT scored 60 points. Both AIs had discrepancies in their incorrect answers. Despite ChatGPT’s proficiency, Copilot displayed superior performance, ranking as the second-best score among the 108 otolaryngologists who took the exam, while ChatGPT was placed 83rd. A chat powered by GPT-4 with internet access (Copilot) demonstrates superior performance in responding to multiple-choice medical questions compared to ChatGPT 3.5.
Examining the Performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and Microsoft Copilot in Otolaryngology: A Comparative Study with Otolaryngologists’ Evaluation / Mayo-Yanez, M.; Lechien, J. R.; Maria-Saibene, A.; Vaira, L. A.; Maniaci, A.; Chiesa-Estomba, C. M.. - In: INDIAN JOURNAL OF OTOLARYNGOLOGY AND HEAD AND NECK SURGERY. - ISSN 2231-3796. - 76:4(2024), pp. 3465-3469. [10.1007/s12070-024-04729-1]
Examining the Performance of ChatGPT 3.5 and Microsoft Copilot in Otolaryngology: A Comparative Study with Otolaryngologists’ Evaluation
Vaira L. A.;
2024-01-01
Abstract
To evaluate the response capabilities, in a public healthcare system otolaryngology job competition examination, of ChatGPT 3.5 and an internet-connected GPT-4 engine (Microsoft Copilot) with the real scores of otolaryngology specialists as the control group. In September 2023, 135 questions divided into theoretical and practical parts were input into ChatGPT 3.5 and an internet-connected GPT-4. The accuracy of AI responses was compared with the official results from otolaryngologists who took the exam, and statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 14.2. Copilot (GPT-4) outperformed ChatGPT 3.5. Copilot achieved a score of 88.5 points, while ChatGPT scored 60 points. Both AIs had discrepancies in their incorrect answers. Despite ChatGPT’s proficiency, Copilot displayed superior performance, ranking as the second-best score among the 108 otolaryngologists who took the exam, while ChatGPT was placed 83rd. A chat powered by GPT-4 with internet access (Copilot) demonstrates superior performance in responding to multiple-choice medical questions compared to ChatGPT 3.5.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
