Large language models in Chinese anesthesiology residency examinations: a comparative analysis of performance, reliability and clinical reasoning

Read full text
Authors: Shuo Wang, Xiaohui Chi, Quanshui Hao, Hao Wang, Hong Tao, Jing Xiao, Chunrui Wu, Jing Deng, Hui Xu, Rao Sun
Cited by: 1
References: 31

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although large language models (LLMs) show potential in medical education, their effectiveness in Chinese anesthesiology Standardized Residency Training Program (SRTP) exams remains unexplored. This study aimed to assess the performance, consistency, and clinical reasoning capabilities of LLMs in this specific context. METHODS: We conducted a multidimensional evaluation of three LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Gemini 1.5 Pro) using a 210-question Chinese mock SRTP exam. The exam encompassed four types of questions with increasing complexity: A1 (knowledge-recall), A2 (knowledge-application), A3/A4 (multi-step clinical scenarios), and case-analysis (complex reasoning with partial-credit scoring). Each model was tested across 30 repeated iterations to evaluate both accuracy and consistency. Their performance was compared to anonymized results from 32 human SRTP trainees. RESULTS: All LLMs exceeded the passing threshold (400/650 points). Among them, Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest mean score (495.4 ± 9.5), followed by Gemini 1.5 Pro (493.8 ± 4.3) and GPT-4o (482.4 ± 10.9). Gemini 1.5 Pro outperformed the others on A1 questions (82.5% median accuracy, P < 0.05 vs. both models) and image-based questions (60% median accuracy, P < 0.001 vs. both models), whereas Claude 3.5 Sonnet excelled in A2 questions (78.3% accuracy, P < 0.01 vs. both models). Performance decreased with increasing question complexity, with median accuracies of 55% for A3/A4 questions and 28.6–33.3% for case-analysis questions. In terms of consistency, Gemini 1.5 Pro answered 64.3% of its questions correctly in all 30 attempts, compared to 51.2% for Claude 3.5 Sonnet (P > 0.05 vs. Gemini 1.5 Pro) and 42.7% for GPT-4o (P = 0.04 vs. Gemini 1.5 Pro). Notably, all LLMs outperformed human trainees, who had an average score of 426.8 ± 25.9 (all P values < 0.001), although the gap narrowed for the most complex questions. CONCLUSIONS: State-of-the-art LLMs demonstrate high proficiency on Chinese anesthesiology SRTP exams, surpassing human performance in structured assessments. Their strengths in knowledge recall and potential for scalable feedback make them promising adjuncts for mitigating training disparities. However, the diminished performance in complex clinical reasoning tasks suggests that these models should complement rather than replace human-centric education.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills Topic Modeling

Publication details

Journal / source
BMC Medical Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Volume
26
Issue
1
Publication date
31 January 2026
Language
EN