Evaluates a model's ability to answer medical multiple-choice questions, testing both domain-specific knowledge retrieval and deep medical reasoning capabilities. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MedMCQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Medmcqa Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-medmcqa-eval)
---
name: medmcqa-eval
description: Evaluates a model's ability to answer medical multiple-choice questions, testing both domain-specific knowledge retrieval and deep medical reasoning capabilities. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MedMCQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2203.14371
bibtex_key: pal2022medmcqa
confidence: high
---
# medmcqa-eval
> MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answering — Pal et al. (2022) (arXiv:2203.14371, 2022)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a model's ability to answer medical multiple-choice questions, testing both domain-specific knowledge retrieval and deep medical reasoning capabilities.
## Datasets
- **MedMCQA** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Standard multiple-choice accuracy: the proportion of questions where the model's predicted option exactly matches the ground-truth correct option.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Concatenated sequence: [CLS] Context [SEP] Question [SEP] Option [SEP] (with context) or [CLS] Question [SEP] Option [SEP] (without context). Passages are truncated to 250 tokens.
**Output**: A single predicted option index selected via softmax over the [CLS] token's final hidden state.
## Scoring recipe
```python
correct = 0
for q, options, gold_idx in dataset:
logits = model(input_ids)
pred_idx = argmax(logits[0])
if pred_idx == gold_idx:
correct += 1
accuracy = correct / len(dataset)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Retrieval errors from the dense passage retriever are often conflated with the reader model's reasoning failures.
- Truncating medical passages to 250 tokens may discard critical clinical details needed to answer the question.
- Evaluating only on the test set without reporting calibration or confidence scores limits understanding of model reliability in high-stakes medical domains.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> A linear layer with softmax is applied over the output of the [CLS] token of the encoder. This is to select the most appropriate option for a question and context pair. ... The model checkpoint with the highest validation score in the 5 epochs was selected and used to evaluate the Test Set.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{pal2022medmcqa,
title={MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answering},
author={Pal et al. (2022)},
year={2022},
note={arXiv:2203.14371}
}
```
- arXiv: 2203.14371