Search

OBJECTIVE: We, therefore, aim to conduct a systematic review to assess the academic potential of ChatGPT-3.5, along with its strengths and limitations when giving medical exams. METHOD: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systemic search of the literature was performed using electronic databases PUBMED/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane. Articles from their inception till April 4, 2023, were queried. A formal narrative analysis was conducted by systematically arranging similarities and differences between individual findings together. RESULTS: After rigorous screening, 12 articles underwent this review. All the selected papers assessed the academic performance of ChatGPT-3.5. One study compared the performance of ChatGPT-3.5 with the performance of ChatGPT-4 when giving a medical exam. Overall, ChatGPT performed well in 4 tests, averaged in 4 tests, and performed badly in 4 tests. ChatGPT's performance was directly proportional to the level of the questions' difficulty but was unremarkable on whether the questions were binary, descriptive, or MCQ-based. ChatGPT's explanation, reasoning, memory, and accuracy were remarkably good, whereas it failed to understand image-based questions, and lacked insight and critical thinking. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT-3.5 performed satisfactorily in the exams it took as an examinee. However, there is a need for future related studies to fully explore the potential of ChatGPT in medical education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]