Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) show promise in clinical applications, but their performance in women’s health remains underexamined 1. We evaluated LLMs on 2,337 questions from obstetrics and gynaecology, including 1,392 from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Part 2 examination (MRCOG Part 2) 2, a UK-based test of advanced clinical decision-making, and 945 from MedQA3, a dataset derived from the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE). The best-performing model—OpenAI’s o1-preview4 enhanced with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)5,6—achieved 72.00% accuracy on MRCOG Part 2 and 92.30% on MedQA, exceeding prior benchmarks by 21.6%1. General-purpose reasoning models outperformed domain-specific fine-tuned models such as MED-LM7. We also analyse performance by clinical subdomain and discover lower accuracy in areas like fetal medicine and postpartum care. These findings highlight the importance of reasoning capabilities over domain-specific fine-tuning and demonstrate the value of augmentation methods like RAG for improving accuracy and interpretability8.
Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding StatementThis study did not receive any funding
Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data availabilityAll data used in this study were obtained from publicly available sources. The specific sources for all datasets are cited in the reference list of this manuscript.
Comments (0)