Evidence mapPaperPMID 41998016Full record

ArticleScientific data2026

A Dataset for Evaluating Large Language Models on Chinese National Medical Licensing Examinations.

Hui Zong, Jiaxue Cha, Jiao Wang, Yu Song, Yan Zhao, Muyun Shi, Bairong Shen

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Hui Zong *Joint Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence for Critical Care Medicine, Department of Critical Care Medicine and Institutes for Systems Genetics, Frontiers Science Center for Disease-related Molecular Network, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Jiaxue Cha *Shanghai Key Laboratory of Signaling and Disease Research, School of Life Sciences and Technology, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China.
Jiao WangJoint Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence for Critical Care Medicine, Department of Critical Care Medicine and Institutes for Systems Genetics, Frontiers Science Center for Disease-related Molecular Network, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Yu SongShanghai Key Laboratory of Signaling and Disease Research, School of Life Sciences and Technology, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China.
Yan ZhaoDepartment of Prevention Healthcare, Southwest Hospital, First Affiliated Hospital of the Army Medical University, Chongqing, 400038, China.
Muyun ShiDepartment of Neurology, Qingyang People's Hospital, Qingyang, 745000, China.
Bairong ShenJoint Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence for Critical Care Medicine, Department of Critical Care Medicine and Institutes for Systems Genetics, Frontiers Science Center for Disease-related Molecular Network, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China. bairong.shen@scu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2899-1531

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 32270690Sichuan Provincial Science and Technology Support Program 2024YFHZ0205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in medical education, question answering, and clinical reasoning, yet standardized datasets in non-English contexts remain limited. To address this gap, we present CNMLEQA, a benchmark dataset for evaluating LLMs on the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination. The dataset integrates question-answer pairs from three sources, including PubMed, GitHub, and MedExamLLM. CNMLEQA comprises two subsets: CNMLEQA-10k (9,890 questions) and CNMLEQA-3k (2,949 questions), each consisting of multiple-choice questions with five options and one correct answer. Questions are annotated with key dimensions including: (1) question type (knowledge-based or case-based), (2) auxiliary metadata such as examination year, 3) clinical scenario information across five dimensions: disease or diagnosis, surgery, medication, laboratory examination, and symptom or sign. Annotation was conducted by clinical experts. To validate the dataset, we evaluated state-of-the-art LLMs including Gemini, DeepSeek, GPT, Qwen, and LLaMA, and conducted fine-tuning experiments specifically on Qwen models. Results show that Qwen2.5-32B achieved the accuracy of 90.88% on CNMLEQA-10k, while DeepSeek-R1 achieved the accuracy of 91.59% on CNMLEQA-3k. The fine-tuning experiments further demonstrated significant performance improvements. CNMLEQA provides a multidimensional, clinically grounded benchmark for advancing LLM evaluation in Chinese medical applications.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalLarge Language ModelsLicensure, MedicalChinaHumans

Identifiers

PMID41998016
PMCPMC13272756

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.