MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2196/77357

Медицинская библиотека · JMIR formative research · 2025

Performance of DeepSeek-R1, ChatGPT (GPT-o3-mini), and Gemini 2.0 Flash on German Medical Multiple-Choice Questions: Comparative Evaluation.

Meyer Annika, Karay Yassin, Steinbicker Andrea U, Streichert Thomas, Overbeek Remco

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Despite the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI)-based chatbots in medicine, their implementation is hindered by data privacy and security concerns. DeepSeek offers a conceivable solution through its capability for local offline operations. However, as of 2025, it remains unclear whether DeepSeek can achieve an accuracy comparable to that of conventional, cloud-based AI chatbots.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate whether DeepSeek, an AI-based chatbot capable of offline operation, achieves answer accuracy on medical multiple-choice questions (MCQs) comparable to that of leading chatbots (ie, ChatGPT and Gemini) on German medical MCQs, thereby assessing its potential as a privacy-preserving alternative for clinical use.

METHODS

A total of 200 interdisciplinary MCQs from the German Progress Test Medicine were administered to ChatGPT (GPT-o3-mini), DeepSeek (DeepSeek-R1), and Gemini (Gemini 2.0 Flash). Accuracy was defined as the proportion of correctly solved questions. Overall differences among the 3 models were tested with the Cochran Q test, while pairwise comparisons were conducted using the McNemar test. Subgroup analyses were performed by medical domain (Fisher exact test) and question length (Wilcoxon rank-sum test). An a priori power analysis indicated a minimum sample size of 195 questions.

RESULTS

All 3 chatbots surpassed the conventional passing threshold of 60%, with accuracies of 96% (192/200) for DeepSeek, 94% (188/200) for Gemini, and 92.5% (185/200) for ChatGPT. The overall difference among models was not statistically significant (P=.10) nor were pairwise comparisons. However, incorrect responses were significantly associated with longer question length for DeepSeek (P=.049) and ChatGPT (P=.04) but not for Gemini. No significant differences in performance were observed across clinical versus preclinical domains or medical specialties (all P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, DeepSeek demonstrates outstanding performance on German medical MCQs comparable to the widely used chatbots ChatGPT and Gemini. Similar to ChatGPT, DeepSeek's performance declined with increasing question length, highlighting verbosity as a persistent challenge for large language models. While DeepSeek's offline capability and lower operational costs are advantageous, its safe and reliable application in clinical contexts requires further investigation.

Для цитирования: Meyer Annika, Karay Yassin, Steinbicker Andrea U, Streichert Thomas, Overbeek Remco. Performance of DeepSeek-R1, ChatGPT (GPT-o3-mini), and Gemini 2.0 Flash on German Medical Multiple-Choice Questions: Comparative Evaluation.. JMIR formative research. 2025. DOI: 10.2196/77357.

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.