Background: ChatGPT has shown impressive performance in national medical licensing examinations, such as the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), even passing it with expert-level performance. However, there is a lack of research on its performance in low-income countries’ national licensing medical examinations. In Peru, where almost one out of three examinees fails the national licensing medical examination, ChatGPT has the potential to enhance medical education. Objective: We aimed to assess the accuracy of ChatGPT using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the Peruvian National Licensing Medical Examination (Examen Nacional de Medicina [ENAM]). Additionally, we sought to identify factors associated with incorrect answers provided by ChatGPT. Methods: We used the ENAM 2022 data set, which consisted of 180 multiple-choice questions, to evaluate the performance of ChatGPT. Various prompts were used, and accuracy was evaluated. The performance of ChatGPT was compared to that of a sample of 1025 examinees. Factors such as question type, Peruvian-specific knowledge, discrimination, difficulty, quality of questions, and subject were analyzed to determine their influence on incorrect answers. Questions that received incorrect answers underwent a three-step process involving different prompts to explore the potential impact of adding roles and context on ChatGPT’s accuracy. Results: GPT-4 achieved an accuracy of 86% on the ENAM, followed by GPT-3.5 with 77%. The accuracy obtained by the 1025 examinees was 55%. There was a fair agreement (κ=0.38) between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Moderate-to-high-difficulty questions were associated with incorrect answers in the crude and adjusted model for GPT-3.5 (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 2.73-15.95) and GPT-4 (OR 33.23, 95% CI 4.3-257.12). After reinputting questions that received incorrect answers, GPT-3.5 went from 41 (100%) to 12 (29%) incorrect answers, and GPT-4 from 25 (100%) to 4 (16%). Conclusions: Our study found that ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) can achieve expert-level performance on the ENAM, outperforming most of our examinees. We found fair agreement between both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Incorrect answers were associated with the difficulty of questions, which may resemble human performance. Furthermore, by reinputting questions that initially received incorrect answers with different prompts containing additional roles and context, ChatGPT achieved improved accuracy.

Purpose: We aimed to describe the performance and evaluate the educational value of justifications provided by artificial intelligence chatbots, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Bard, Claude, and Bing, on the Peruvian National Medical Licensing Examination (P-NLME).Methods: This was a cross-sectional analytical study. On July 25, 2023, each multiple-choice question (MCQ) from the P-NLME was entered into each chatbot (GPT-3, GPT-4, Bing, Bard, and Claude) 3 times. Then, 4 medical educators categorized the MCQs in terms of medical area, item type, and whether the MCQ required Peru-specific knowledge. They assessed the educational value of the justifications from the 2 top performers (GPT-4 and Bing).Results: GPT-4 scored 86.7% and Bing scored 82.2%, followed by Bard and Claude, and the historical performance of Peruvian examinees was 55%. Among the factors associated with correct answers, only MCQs that required Peru-specific knowledge had lower odds (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.09–0.61), whereas the remaining factors showed no associations. In assessing the educational value of justifications provided by GPT-4 and Bing, neither showed any significant differences in certainty, usefulness, or potential use in the classroom.Conclusion: Among chatbots, GPT-4 and Bing were the top performers, with Bing performing better at Peru-specific MCQs. Moreover, the educational value of justifications provided by the GPT-4 and Bing could be deemed appropriate. However, it is essential to start addressing the educational value of these chatbots, rather than merely their performance on examinations.

Background: Dengue has emerged as an unprecedented epidemic in Peru, and it is anticipated that this issue will escalate further owing to climate change. This study aimed to determine the risk factors associated with death from dengue in patients treated at Hospital II in Pucallpa, Peru. Methodology: This retrospective cohort study collected information from the medical records of patients with a diagnosis of dengue treated at Hospital II Pucallpa-Peru between January 2019 and March 2023. The primary outcome was death, and the secondary outcome was death, development of severe dengue, or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Cox regression models were used to determine risk factors. Findings: The clinical records of 152 patients were evaluated, with a median age of 27.5 years (interquartile range, 11–45). Among all patients, 29 (19.1%) developed severe dengue, 31 (20.4%) were admitted to the ICU, and 13 (8.6%) died during follow-up. In the survival analysis, bilirubin >1.2 mg/dL was associated with a higher risk of death aHR: 11.38 (95% CI: 1.2 106.8). Additionally, factors associated with poor prognosis included having 1 to 3 comorbidities aRR: 1.92 (1.2 to 3.2), AST ≥251 U/L aRR: 6.79 (2.2 to 21.4), history of previous dengue aRR: 1.84 (1.0 to 3.3), and fibrinogen ≥400 mg/dL aRR: 2.23 (1.2 to 4.1). Significance: Elevated bilirubin was associated with death from dengue, whereas an increase in comorbidities and a history of previous dengue were related to a poor prognosis of the disease. Early identification of severe dengue would be more feasible with improved access to laboratory testing, particularly in tropical areas with a high dengue incidence.

Purpose: This study aimed to identify factors that have been studied for their associations with National Licensing Examination (ENAM) scores in Peru.Methods: A search was conducted of literature databases and registers, including EMBASE, SciELO, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Peru’s National Register of Research Work, and Google Scholar. The following key terms were used: “ENAM” and “associated factors.” Studies in English and Spanish were included. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).Results: In total, 38,500 participants were enrolled in 12 studies. Most (11/12) studies were cross-sectional, except for one case-control study. Three studies were published in peer-reviewed journals. The mean MERSQI was 10.33. A better performance on the ENAM was associated with a higher-grade point average (GPA) (n=8), internship setting in EsSalud (n=4), and regular academic status (n=3). Other factors showed associations in various studies, such as medical school, internship setting, age, gender, socioeconomic status, simulations test, study resources, preparation time, learning styles, study techniques, test-anxiety, and self-regulated learning strategies.Conclusion: The ENAM is a multifactorial phenomenon; our model gives students a locus of control on what they can do to improve their score (i.e., implement self-regulated learning strategies) and faculty, health policymakers, and managers a framework to improve the ENAM score (i.e., design remediation programs to improve GPA and integrate anxiety-management courses into the curriculum).

Introduction: Clinical reasoning is crucial in medical practice, yet its teaching faces challenges due to varied clinical experiences, limited time, and absence from competency frameworks. Despite efforts, effective teaching methodologies remain elusive. Strategies like the One Minute Preceptor (OMP) and SNAPPS are proposed as solutions, particularly in workplace settings. SNAPPS, introduced in 2003, offers a structured approach but lacks comprehensive evidence of its effectiveness. Methodological shortcomings hinder discerning its specific effects. Therefore, a systematic review is proposed to evaluate SNAPPS' impact on clinical reasoning teaching. Content: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SNAPPS against other methods. Data selection and extraction were performed in duplicate. Bias and certainty of evidence were evaluated using Cochrane RoB-2 and GRADE approach. Summary: We identified five RCTs performed on medical students and residents. Two compared SNAPPS with an active control such as One Minute Preceptor or training with feedback. None reported the effects of SNAPPS in workplace settings (Kirkpatrick Level 3) or patients (Kirkpatrick Level 4). Low to moderate certainty of evidence suggests that SNAPPS increases the total presentation length by increasing discussion length. Low to moderate certainty of evidence may increase the number of differential diagnoses and the expression of uncertainties. Low certainty of evidence suggests that SNAPPS may increase the odds of trainees initiating a management plan and seeking clarification. Outlook: Evidence from this systematic review suggests that SNAPPS has some advantages in terms of clinical reasoning, self-directed learning outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, it appears more beneficial when used by residents than medical students. However, future research should explore outcomes outside SNAPPS-related outcomes, such as workplace or patient-related outcomes.

Medical knowledge keeps growing and education doesn’t end with college, on the contrary, we need lifelong learners. Our future doctors require new tools to develop goal-outcome behaviors, select strategies to achieve better care to patients and to become lifelong learners. Thus self-regulated learning (SRL) emerge as a promise land. Our objective in this review is to describe the research conducted on interventions and training programs to promote self-regulated learning skills in medical students. A literature search was conducted following Garcia Peñalvo model for systematic reviews and the PRISMA statement, the search includes Web Of Science (WOS), EBSCO, ProQuest, Scopus, PubMed and Scielo from 2009 to 2022. We identified 362 articles, 7 were eligible for evaluation. Seven (100%) studies were longitudinal, three were randomized clinical trials. The country that contributed the most literature was the United States, no articles were found in Latin America; the most used instrument to measure SRL was the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), most of the interventions teach SRL skills in implicit manners, two of them teach SRL skills in explicit manners. There is a large field to explore regarding interventions and training programs to foster SRL in medical students.