ArticleAmerican journal of clinical and experimental urology2025
DeepSeek vs ChatGPT: a comparison study of their performance in answering prostate cancer radiotherapy questions in multiple languages.
Article in American journal of clinical and experimental urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Capacity of Understanding the Future Approaches in Cancer Treatment by Multiple Models of Artificial Intelligence.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- The Performance of ChatGPT-4o and DeepSeek-R1 in Interpreting Thyroid Nodule Ultrasound Text Reports: Multicenter Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions of Large Language Models in Health Care Communication: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o's and DeepSeek R1's responses to urological problems: a comparative study.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Applications of DeepSeek in Medicine: Bibliometric Analysis and Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Comparison of the performance of large language models in answering patient questions related to cataract.iScience · 2026Article
- Performance of five large language models in oral and maxillofacial surgery exam questions: a comparative study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Clinical Competence of Large Language Models in Prostate Cancer Management: A Comparative Study of DeepSeek-R1 and ChatGPT.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Comparison of online radiologists and large language model chatbots in responding to common radiology-related questions in Chinese: a cross-sectional comparative analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Automated Tumor and Node Staging from Esophageal Cancer Endoscopic Ultrasound Reports: A Benchmark of Advanced Reasoning Models with Prompt Engineering and Cross-Lingual Evaluation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- AI-driven precision diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer: a narrative review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- ChatGPT-4 vs. DeepSeek-V3: a comparative study of response quality, reliability, usefulness, and readability for exercise and rehabilitation strategies in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Cyberbullying victimization identification and large language model-assisted assessment: a study of cyberbullying victimization lexicon construction and validation.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Promoting Responsible DeepSeek Deployment in Health Care: Scoping Review Comparing Grey and White Literature.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Can Artificial Intelligence Educate Patients? Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT and DeepSeek Models in Meniscus Injuries.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- DeepSeek-R1 for automated scoring in radiology residency examinations: an agreement and test-retest reliability study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- From Mutation to Prognosis: AI-HOPE-PI3K Enables Artificial Intelligence Agent-Driven Integration of PI3K Pathway Data in Colorectal Cancer Precision Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Accuracy of AI chatbots in answering frequently asked questions on cervical cancer.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe medical information generated by large language models (LLM) is crucial for improving patient education and clinical decision-making. This study aims to evaluate the performance of two LLMs (DeepSeek and ChatGPT) in answering questions related to prostate cancer radiotherapy in both Chinese and English environments. Through a comparative analysis, we aim to determine which model can provide higher-quality answers in different language environments.
methodsA structured evaluation framework was developed using a set of clinically relevant questions covering three key domains: foundational knowledge, patient education, and treatment and follow-up care. Responses from DeepSeek and ChatGPT were generated in both English and Chinese and independently assessed by a panel of five oncology specialists using a five-point Likert scale. Statistical analyses, including the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, were performed to compare the models' performance across different linguistic contexts.
resultsThis study ultimately included 33 questions for scoring. In Chinese, DeepSeek outperformed ChatGPT, achieving top ratings (score = 5) in 75.76% vs. 36.36% of responses (P < 0.001), excelling in foundational knowledge (76.92% vs. 38.46%,
conclusionsThis study shows that DeepSeek performs excellently in providing Chinese medical information, while the two models perform similarly in an English environment. These findings underscore the importance of selecting language-specific artificial intelligence (AI) models to enhance the accuracy and reliability of medical AI applications. While both models show promise in supporting patient education and clinical decision-making, human expert review remains necessary to ensure response accuracy and minimize potential misinformation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.