Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2310.08410

Evaluation of ChatGPT-Generated Medical Responses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Qiuhong Wei·Zhengxiong Yao·Ying Cui·Bo Wei·Zhezhen Jin·Ximing Xu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large language models such as ChatGPT are increasingly explored in medical domains. However, the absence of standard guidelines for performance evaluation has led to methodological inconsistencies. This study aims to summarize the available evidence on evaluating ChatGPT's performance in medicine and provide direction for future research. We searched ten medical literature databases on June 15, 2023, using the keyword "ChatGPT". A total of 3520 articles were identified, of which 60 were reviewed and summarized in this paper and 17 were included in the meta-analysis. The analysis showed that ChatGPT displayed an overall integrated accuracy of 56% (95% CI: 51%-60%, I2 = 87%) in addressing medical queries. However, the studies varied in question resource, question-asking process, and evaluation metrics. Moreover, many studies failed to report methodological details, including the version of ChatGPT and whether each question was used independently or repeatedly. Our findings revealed that although ChatGPT demonstrated considerable potential for application in healthcare, the heterogeneity of the studies and insufficient reporting may affect the reliability of these results. Further well-designed studies with comprehensive and transparent reporting are needed to evaluate ChatGPT's performance in medicine.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.ML

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Qiuhong Wei, Zhengxiong Yao, Ying Cui, Bo Wei, Zhezhen Jin, Ximing Xu. 2023-10-12. Evaluation of ChatGPT-Generated Medical Responses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104620

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗