ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Artificial Intelligence Outperforms Physicians in General Medical Knowledge, Except in the Paediatrics Domain: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence for pediatric neuroimaging.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Performance of three large language models in answering parent-focused questions on rickets: a dual pediatric-orthopedic specialist evaluation.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Large language models as clinical decision-support tools in multiple sclerosis and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders: A comparative study of ChatGPT-4o and neurologists.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
- Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Transforming the Future.Missouri medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence (genAI) shows promising results in clinical practice. This study compared a GPT-4-turbo virtual assistant with physicians from Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal on medical knowledge derived from national exams while analysing knowledge retention over time and domain-specific performance. Via a digital platform, 17,144 physicians provided 221,574 answers to 600 exam questions between December 2022 and February 2024. Physicians were stratified by years since graduation and specialty, and the assistant answered the same questions in each native language. Differences in proportions of correct answers were tested with binomial logistic regression (odds ratios, 95% CI) or Fisher's exact test (α = 0.05). The assistant outperformed physicians in all countries (72-96% vs. 46-62%; logistic regression,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.