MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1245/s10434-026-19745-4

Медицинская библиотека · Annals of surgical oncology · 2026

Benchmarking Large Language Models for Bladder Cancer: Comparative Knowledge Retrieval and Clinical Reasoning of DeepSeek and ChatGPT.

Peng Lei, Zhang Yi, Zhao Anguo, Li Rongkang, Li Zhilin, Zhao Jiadong, Yu Peng, Liu Yang, Shi Hongjin, Liang Rui, Wang Haifeng

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the comparative performance of DeepSeek-R1, ChatGPT-5 Pro, and urologists in the specific domains of bladder cancer knowledge retrieval and complex clinical reasoning.

METHODS

We constructed a benchmark dataset comprising 91 standardized multiple-choice questions on bladder cancer derived from MedQA, MedMCQA, and the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination, alongside three retrospectively reconstructed real-world cases. Five advanced models, including DeepSeek (V3, R1) and OpenAI variants (ChatGPT-5, ChatGPT-5 Pro, ChatGPT-5 Mini), were evaluated. Accuracy and stability were assessed across three independent runs for standardized questions. In clinical simulations, DeepSeek-R1 and ChatGPT-5 Pro were benchmarked against human urologists. A blinded expert panel of three senior urologists evaluated responses using a 5-point Likert scale across four dimensions: readability, medical accuracy, diagnostic test appropriateness, and logical coherence.

RESULTS

In standardized testing, all models achieved >92% accuracy. ChatGPT-5 Pro ranked first (97.52%), followed closely by DeepSeek-R1 (95.04%), with both displaying superior stability. In clinical simulations, DeepSeek-R1 demonstrated logical coherence comparable to both human experts and ChatGPT-5 Pro (P > 0.05). However, DeepSeek-R1 scored significantly lower than ChatGPT-5 Pro regarding readability and "error-free" rates. Notably, human urologists significantly outperformed both AI models in diagnostic test appropriateness (P < 0.01), primarily because DeepSeek-R1 struggled with "test avoidance," tending to recommend redundant investigations (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

DeepSeek-R1 demonstrates excellent accuracy and expert-level clinical reasoning, exhibiting competitiveness with ChatGPT-5 Pro. Although slightly inferior in readability and prone to suggesting unnecessary tests, its core reasoning capabilities remain favorable.

Для цитирования: Peng Lei, Zhang Yi, Zhao Anguo, Li Rongkang, Li Zhilin, Zhao Jiadong, Yu Peng, Liu Yang, Shi Hongjin, Liang Rui, Wang Haifeng. Benchmarking Large Language Models for Bladder Cancer: Comparative Knowledge Retrieval and Clinical Reasoning of DeepSeek and ChatGPT.. Annals of surgical oncology. 2026. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-026-19745-4.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.