MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378528433 · doi:10.2196/47305

Performance of the Large Language Model ChatGPT on the National Nurse Examinations in Japan: Evaluation Study

2023· article· en· W4378528433 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Nursing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsMultiple choiceTest (biology)CertificationSpecialtyReading (process)Simple (philosophy)MedicineNursingPsychologyMedical educationFamily medicineLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: ChatGPT, a large language model, has shown good performance on physician certification examinations and medical consultations. However, its performance has not been examined in languages other than English or on nursing examinations. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT on the Japanese National Nurse Examinations. METHODS: We evaluated the percentages of correct answers provided by ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) for all questions on the Japanese National Nurse Examinations from 2019 to 2023, excluding inappropriate questions and those containing images. Inappropriate questions were pointed out by a third-party organization and announced by the government to be excluded from scoring. Specifically, these include "questions with inappropriate question difficulty" and "questions with errors in the questions or choices." These examinations consist of 240 questions each year, divided into basic knowledge questions that test the basic issues of particular importance to nurses and general questions that test a wide range of specialized knowledge. Furthermore, the questions had 2 types of formats: simple-choice and situation-setup questions. Simple-choice questions are primarily knowledge-based and multiple-choice, whereas situation-setup questions entail the candidate reading a patient's and family situation's description, and selecting the nurse's action or patient's response. Hence, the questions were standardized using 2 types of prompts before requesting answers from ChatGPT. Chi-square tests were conducted to compare the percentage of correct answers for each year's examination format and specialty area related to the question. In addition, a Cochran-Armitage trend test was performed with the percentage of correct answers from 2019 to 2023. RESULTS: The 5-year average percentage of correct answers for ChatGPT was 75.1% (SD 3%) for basic knowledge questions and 64.5% (SD 5%) for general questions. The highest percentage of correct answers on the 2019 examination was 80% for basic knowledge questions and 71.2% for general questions. ChatGPT met the passing criteria for the 2019 Japanese National Nurse Examination and was close to passing the 2020-2023 examinations, with only a few more correct answers required to pass. ChatGPT had a lower percentage of correct answers in some areas, such as pharmacology, social welfare, related law and regulations, endocrinology/metabolism, and dermatology, and a higher percentage of correct answers in the areas of nutrition, pathology, hematology, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, dentistry and dental surgery, and nursing integration and practice. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT only passed the 2019 Japanese National Nursing Examination during the most recent 5 years. Although it did not pass the examinations from other years, it performed very close to the passing level, even in those containing questions related to psychology, communication, and nursing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.244
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it