Skip to main content
JDRS · Open access journal

Original Article · Open access

Assessing the performance of ChatGPT-4o on the Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Board Examination

PDF Cite this article

Hilal Yağar

Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Ömer Halisdemir University Faculty of Medicine, Niğde, Türkiye

ORCID: 0000-0001-5544-0458

Ender Gümüşoğlu

Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Division of Hand Surgery, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Türkiye

ORCID: 0000-0003-1725-5256

Zeynel Mert Asfuroğlu

Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Division of Hand Surgery, Mersin University Faculty of Medicine, Mersin, Türkiye

ORCID: 0000-0001-8796-4133

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to assess the overall performance of ChatGPT version 4-omni (GPT-4o) on the Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Board Examination (TOTBE) using actual examinees as a reference point to evaluate and compare the performance of GPT-4o with that of human participants.

Materials and methods: In this study, GPT-4o was tested with multiple-choice questions that formed the first step of 14 TOTBEs conducted between 2010 and 2023. The assessment of image-based questions was conducted separately for all exams. The questions were classified based on the subspecialties for the five exams (2010-2014). The performance of GPT-4o was assessed and compared to those of actual examinees of the TOTBE.

Results: The mean total score of GPT-4o was 70.2±5.64 (range, 61 to 84), whereas that of actual examinees was 58±3.28 (range, 53.6 to 64.6). Considering accuracy rates, GPT-4o demonstrated 62% accuracy on image-based questions and 70% accuracy on text-based questions. It also demonstrated superior performance in the field of basic sciences, whereas actual examinees performed better in the specialty of reconstruction. Both GPT-4o and actual examinees exhibited the lowest scores in the subspecialty of lower extremity and foot.

Conclusion: Our study results showed that GPT-4o performed well on the TOTBE, particularly in basic sciences. While it demonstrated accuracy comparable to actual examinees in some areas, these findings highlight its potential as a helpful tool in medical education.

Declarations

Author Contributions

Idea/concept, design, data collection and/or processing, analysis and/or interpretation: H.Y.; Idea/concept, design, data collection and/or processing, literature review: E.G.; Idea/concept, design, control/ supervision, writing the article: Z.M.A.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Financial Disclosure

The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.

Data Sharing Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.