Evaluation of Multiple-Choice Tests in Head and Neck Ultrasound Created by Physicians and Large Language Models
- PMID: 40804813
- PMCID: PMC12346108
- DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics15151848
Evaluation of Multiple-Choice Tests in Head and Neck Ultrasound Created by Physicians and Large Language Models
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Otolaryngologists are increasingly using head and neck ultrasound (HNUS). Determining whether a practitioner of HNUS has achieved adequate theoretical knowledge remains a challenge. This study assesses the performance of two large language models (LLMs) in generating multiple-choice questions (MCQs) for head and neck ultrasound, compared with MCQs generated by physicians. Methods: Physicians and LLMs (ChatGPT, GPT4o, and Google Gemini, Gemini Advanced) created a total of 90 MCQs that covered the topics of lymph nodes, thyroid, and salivary glands. Experts in HNUS additionally evaluated all physician-drafted MCQs using a Delphi-like process. The MCQs were assessed by an international panel of experts in HNUS, who were blinded to the source of the questions. Using a Likert scale, the evaluation was based on an overall assessment including six assessment criteria: clarity, relevance, suitability, quality of distractors, adequate rationale of the answer, and an assessment of the level of difficulty. Results: Four experts in the clinical field of HNUS assessed the 90 MCQs. No significant differences were observed between the two LLMs. Physician-drafted questions (n = 30) had significant differences with Google Gemini in terms of relevance, suitability, and adequate rationale of the answer, but only significant differences in terms of suitability compared with ChatGPT. Compared to MCQ items (n = 16) validated by medical experts, LLM-constructed MCQ items scored significantly lower across all criteria. The difficulty level of the MCQs was the same. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that both LLMs could be used to generate MCQ items with a quality comparable to drafts from physicians. However, the quality of LLM-generated MCQ items was still significantly lower than MCQs validated by ultrasound experts. LLMs are therefore cost-effective to generate a quick draft for MCQ items that afterward should be validated by experts before being used for assessment purposes. In this way, the value of LLM is not the elimination of humans, but rather vastly superior time management.
Keywords: AI; LLM; head and neck; learning; multiple-choice quiz; ultrasound.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks.2025 Jul 6. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan–. 2025 Jul 6. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan–. PMID: 30726003 Free Books & Documents.
-
Quality of Human Expert vs Large Language Model-Generated Multiple-Choice Questions in the Field of Mechanical Ventilation.Chest. 2025 Jul 18:S0012-3692(25)00837-2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2025.07.005. Online ahead of print. Chest. 2025. PMID: 40684906
-
Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Dec 1;482(12):2193-2208. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003185. Epub 2024 Jul 23. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024. PMID: 39051924
-
A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan for ovarian cancer.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(28):1-110. doi: 10.3310/hta5280. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 11701100
-
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150. Health Technol Assess. 2001. PMID: 11532236
References
-
- Warm J.J., Melchiors J., Kristensen T.T., Aabenhus K., Charabi B.W., Eberhard K., Konge L., von Buchwald C., Todsen T. Head and neck ultrasound training improves the diagnostic performance of otolaryngology residents. Laryngoscope Investig. Otolaryngol. 2024;9:e1201. doi: 10.1002/lio2.1201. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Garset-Zamani M., Lomholt A.F., Charabi B.W., Norling R., Dejanovic D., Hall J.M., Makouei F., Agander T.K., Ersbøll A.K., von Buchwald C., et al. Surgeon-performed intraoperative transoral ultrasound improves the detection of human papillomavirus-positive head and neck cancers of unknown primary. Oral Oncol. 2024;159:107073. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2024.107073. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Kaltoft M., Hahn C.H., Wessman M., Hansen M.L., Agander T.K., Makouei F., Wessel I., Todsen T. Intraoral Ultrasound versus MRI for Depth of Invasion Measurement in Oral Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Prospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study. Cancers. 2024;16:637. doi: 10.3390/cancers16030637. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Todsen T., Konge L., Lind Jensen M., Ringsted C., Grantcharov T., Guldbrand Nielsen D., Bo Svendsen L. Surgeon-performed ultrasonography Collecting validity evidence for assessment of abdominal and head & neck ultrasonography skills. Dan. Med. J. 2017;64:11. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources