Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026

Measuring Statistical Learning Across Modalities and Domains in School-Aged Children Via an Online Platform and Neuroimaging Techniques
Published on: June 30, 2020
Performance of large language models in medical licensing examinations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Haniyeh Nouri1, Abdollah Mahdavi2, Ali Abedi3
1Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil, Iran.
Purpose:
This study systematically evaluates and compares the performance of large language models (LLMs) in answering medical licensing examination questions. By conducting subgroup analyses based on language, question format, and model type, this meta-analysis aims to provide a comprehensive overview of LLM capabilities in medical education and clinical decision-making.
Methods:
This systematic review, registered in PROSPERO and following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Web of Science for relevant articles published up to February 1, 2025. The search strategy included Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords related to ("ChatGPT" OR "GPT" OR "LLM variants") AND ("medical licensing exam*" OR "medical exam*" OR "medical education" OR "radiology exam*"). Eligible studies evaluated LLM accuracy on medical licensing examination questions. Pooled accuracy was estimated using a random-effects model, with subgroup analyses by LLM type, language, and question format. Publication bias was assessed using Egger's regression test.
Results:
This systematic review identified 2,404 studies. After removing duplicates and excluding irrelevant articles through title and abstract screening, 36 studies were included after full-text review. The pooled accuracy was 72% (95% confidence interval, 70.0% to 75.0%) with high heterogeneity (I2=99%, P<0.001). Among LLMs, GPT-4 achieved the highest accuracy (81%), followed by Bing (79%), Claude (74%), Gemini/Bard (70%), and GPT-3.5 (60%) (P=0.001). Performance differences across languages (range, 62% in Polish to 77% in German) were not statistically significant (P=0.170).
Conclusion:
LLMs, particularly GPT-4, can match or exceed medical students' examination performance and may serve as supportive educational tools. However, due to variability and the risk of errors, they should be used cautiously as complements rather than replacements for traditional learning methods.
More Related Videos
03:14Augmenting Large Language Models via Vector Embeddings to Improve Domain-Specific Responsiveness
Published on: December 6, 2024
05:47Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
Published on: June 13, 2025