Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 7, 2026

Augmenting Large Language Models via Vector Embeddings to Improve Domain-Specific Responsiveness
Published on: December 6, 2024
The use of large language models in generating multiple choice questions for health professions education: A
Lauren Riehm1,2, Keean Nanji3,4, Moiz Lakhani5
1Department of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Purpose:
Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to change medical education. Whether LLMs can generate multiple-choice questions (MCQs) that are of similar quality to those created by humans is unclear. This investigation assessed the quality of MCQs generated by LLMs compared to humans.
Methods:
This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42025608775). A systematic review and frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) or pairwise meta-analysis was performed. Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Scopus were searched from inception to November 1, 2024. The quality of MCQs was assessed with seven pre-defined outcomes: question relevance, clarity, accuracy/correctness; distractor quality; item difficulty analysis; and item discrimination analysis (point biserial correlation and item discrimination index). Continuous data were transformed to a 10-point scale to facilitate statistical analysis and reported as mean differences (MD). The MERSQI and the Grade of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) NMA guidelines were used to assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence assessments.
Results:
Five LLMs were included. NMA demonstrated that ChatGPT 4 generated similar quality MCQs to humans with regards to question relevance (MD -0.13; 95% CI: -0.44,0.18; GRADE: VERY LOW), question clarity (MD -0.03; 95% CI: -0.15,0.10; GRADE: VERY LOW), and distractor quality (MD -0.10; 95% CI: -0.24,0.04; GRADE: VERY LOW); however, MCQs generated by Llama 2 performed worse than humans with regards to question clarity (MD -1.21; 95% CI: -1.60,-0.82; GRADE: VERY LOW) and distractor quality (MD -1.50; 95% CI: -2.03,-0.97; GRADE: VERY LOW). Exploratory post-hoc t-tests demonstrated that ChatGPT 3.5 performed worse than Llama 2 and ChatGPT 4 with regards to question clarity and distractor quality (p < 0.001).
Conclusion:
ChatGPT 4 may create similar quality MCQs to humans, whereas ChatGPT 3.5 and Llama 2 may be of worse quality. Further studies that directly compare these LLMs to human-generated questions and administer MCQs to students are required.
More Related Videos
05:47Evidence-based Knowledge Synthesis and Hypothesis Validation: Navigating Biomedical Knowledge Bases via Explainable AI and Agentic Systems
Published on: June 13, 2025
13:44Project-Based Learning Guidelines for Health Sciences Students: An Analysis with Data Mining and Qualitative Techniques
Published on: December 9, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention I
The health belief model (HBM) attempts to predict health-related behavior in specific belief patterns. According to the HBM, a person's...
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention II
The agent-host-environment model states that disease results...
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Health Literacy
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...