Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41623725›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Comparative evaluation of large language models for hip fracture-related patient questions: DeepSeek-V3-FW, Gemini 2.0 Flash, and ChatGPT-4.5.

Yejin Zhang, Tao Huang, Chaoran Liu, Anna N Miller, Minghui Yang, Ian A Harris, Takeshi Sawaguchi, Theodore Miclau, Maoyi Tian, Chun Sing Chui and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Yejin ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2686-7069
Tao HuangDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Chaoran LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Anna N MillerDepartment of Orthopedics, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center and the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7056-8502
Minghui YangDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, China.
Ian A HarrisSchool of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0887-7627
Takeshi SawaguchiDepartment of Traumatology, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan.
Theodore MiclauDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, School of Medicine, Orthopaedic Trauma Institute, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Maoyi TianSchool of Public Health, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Chun Sing ChuiDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Ning ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Wing Hoi CheungDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Ronald Man Yeung WongDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5615-6627

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in healthcare for patient education and clinical decision support. However, systematic benchmarking in real-world clinical contexts remains limited, particularly for high-risk conditions such as hip fractures. Objective: To evaluate and compare the performance of three state-of-the-art LLMs-DeepSeek-V3-FW, Gemini 2.0 Flash, and ChatGPT-4.5-in answering standardized patient questions on hip fracture management. Methods: Thirty standardized questions covering general knowledge, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation were developed by three specialists in orthopedics and traumatology. Each LLM generated responses independently. Three experienced orthopedic surgeons assessed accuracy (4-point scale) and comprehensiveness (5-point scale). Statistical analyses included Kruskal-Wallis and chi-squared tests. Results: All models demonstrated high reliability, with 96.7% of responses rated "Good" or "Excellent" and none rated "Poor." Mean accuracy scores were comparable across models, and comprehensiveness averaged 4.8/5. DeepSeek-V3-FW tended to provide longer, structured answers and performed best in general knowledge, while Gemini 2.0 Flash excelled in diagnosis and rehabilitation and produced the most concise responses. ChatGPT-4.5 offered shorter, conversational answers with similar accuracy and detail. Conclusions: The three LLMs showed strong capabilities in delivering accurate and comprehensive information on hip fracture care, highlighting their potential as tools for patient education and clinical support. Differences in style and domain-specific strengths suggest complementary roles. Further research is needed to validate safety and integration into clinical workflows.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceclinical decision support systemshealth information managementhip fractureslarge language modelspatient education as topic

Identifiers

PMID41623725
PMCPMC12858731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.