Evaluation of AI models for radiology exam preparation: DeepSeek vs. ChatGPT-3.5.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Medical Education Online Pub Date : 2025-12-31 Epub Date: 2025-11-28 DOI:10.1080/10872981.2025.2589679
Na Hu, Yunpeng Luo, Pinggui Lei
{"title":"Evaluation of AI models for radiology exam preparation: DeepSeek vs. ChatGPT-3.5.","authors":"Na Hu, Yunpeng Luo, Pinggui Lei","doi":"10.1080/10872981.2025.2589679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots has generated significant interest regarding their potential applications within medical education. This study sought to assess the performance of the open-source large language model DeepSeek-V3 in answering radiology board-style questions and to compare its accuracy with that of ChatGPT-3.5.A total of 161 questions (comprising 207 items) were randomly selected from the <i>Exercise Book for the National Senior Health Professional Qualification Examination: Radiology</i>. The question set included single-choice, multiple-choice, shared-stem, and case analysis questions. Both DeepSeek-V3 and ChatGPT-3.5 were evaluated using the same question set over a seven-day testing period. Response accuracy was systematically assessed, and statistical analyses were performed using Pearson's chi-square test and Fisher's exact test.DeepSeek-V3 achieved an overall accuracy of 72%, which was significantly higher than the 55.6% accuracy achieved by ChatGPT-3.5 (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Performance analysis by question type revealed DeepSeek's superior accuracy in single-choice questions (87.1%), though with comparatively lower performance in multiple-choice (55.7%) and case analysis questions (68.0%). Across clinical subspecialties, DeepSeek consistently outperformed ChatGPT, particularly in peripheral nervous system (<i>P</i> = 0.003), respiratory system (<i>P</i> = 0.008), circulatory system (<i>P</i> = 0.012), and musculoskeletal system (<i>P</i> = 0.021) domains.In conclusion, DeepSeek demonstrates considerable potential as an educational tool in radiology, particularly for knowledge recall and foundational learning applications. However, its relatively weaker performance on higher-order cognitive tasks and complex question formats suggests the need for further model refinement. Future research should investigate DeepSeek's capability in processing image-based questions and perform comparative analyses with more advanced models (e.g., GPT-5) to better evaluate its potential for medical education.</p>","PeriodicalId":47656,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education Online","volume":"30 1","pages":"2589679"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12667340/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education Online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2025.2589679","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots has generated significant interest regarding their potential applications within medical education. This study sought to assess the performance of the open-source large language model DeepSeek-V3 in answering radiology board-style questions and to compare its accuracy with that of ChatGPT-3.5.A total of 161 questions (comprising 207 items) were randomly selected from the Exercise Book for the National Senior Health Professional Qualification Examination: Radiology. The question set included single-choice, multiple-choice, shared-stem, and case analysis questions. Both DeepSeek-V3 and ChatGPT-3.5 were evaluated using the same question set over a seven-day testing period. Response accuracy was systematically assessed, and statistical analyses were performed using Pearson's chi-square test and Fisher's exact test.DeepSeek-V3 achieved an overall accuracy of 72%, which was significantly higher than the 55.6% accuracy achieved by ChatGPT-3.5 (P < 0.001). Performance analysis by question type revealed DeepSeek's superior accuracy in single-choice questions (87.1%), though with comparatively lower performance in multiple-choice (55.7%) and case analysis questions (68.0%). Across clinical subspecialties, DeepSeek consistently outperformed ChatGPT, particularly in peripheral nervous system (P = 0.003), respiratory system (P = 0.008), circulatory system (P = 0.012), and musculoskeletal system (P = 0.021) domains.In conclusion, DeepSeek demonstrates considerable potential as an educational tool in radiology, particularly for knowledge recall and foundational learning applications. However, its relatively weaker performance on higher-order cognitive tasks and complex question formats suggests the need for further model refinement. Future research should investigate DeepSeek's capability in processing image-based questions and perform comparative analyses with more advanced models (e.g., GPT-5) to better evaluate its potential for medical education.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

人工智能模型在放射学考试准备中的评估:DeepSeek与ChatGPT-3.5。
人工智能(AI)聊天机器人的快速发展引起了人们对其在医学教育中的潜在应用的极大兴趣。本研究旨在评估开源大型语言模型DeepSeek-V3在回答放射学板式问题方面的性能,并将其准确性与ChatGPT-3.5进行比较。从《国家高级卫生职业资格考试:放射学》练习册中随机抽取161道题(共207题)。问题集包括单选题、多选题、共享题和案例分析问题。DeepSeek-V3和ChatGPT-3.5在7天的测试期内使用相同的问题集进行评估。系统评估反应准确性,采用Pearson卡方检验和Fisher精确检验进行统计分析。DeepSeek-V3的总体准确率为72%,显著高于ChatGPT-3.5 (P = 0.003)、呼吸系统(P = 0.008)、循环系统(P = 0.012)和肌肉骨骼系统(P = 0.021)领域55.6%的准确率。总之,DeepSeek作为放射学的教育工具具有相当大的潜力,特别是在知识回忆和基础学习应用方面。然而,它在高阶认知任务和复杂问题格式上的表现相对较弱,这表明需要进一步改进模型。未来的研究应该调查DeepSeek在处理基于图像的问题方面的能力,并与更先进的模型(如GPT-5)进行比较分析,以更好地评估其在医学教育中的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Education Online
Medical Education Online EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
97
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Education Online is an open access journal of health care education, publishing peer-reviewed research, perspectives, reviews, and early documentation of new ideas and trends. Medical Education Online aims to disseminate information on the education and training of physicians and other health care professionals. Manuscripts may address any aspect of health care education and training, including, but not limited to: -Basic science education -Clinical science education -Residency education -Learning theory -Problem-based learning (PBL) -Curriculum development -Research design and statistics -Measurement and evaluation -Faculty development -Informatics/web
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书