Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41808913›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

Comparative performance of ChatGPT-5 and DeepSeek on the Chinese ultrasound medicine senior professional title examination.

Dao-Rong Hong, Chun-Yan Huang, Jiu Gao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Dao-Rong Hong *Department of Ultrasonography, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian, China.
Chun-Yan Huang *Department of General Practice, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian, China.
Jiu GaoDepartment of General Practice, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing potential for medical education and assessment, but evidence on their performance in specialty certification exams in China-particularly in ultrasound medicine-remains limited. Objective: To compare the performance of ChatGPT-5 and DeepSeek on the Chinese Ultrasound Medicine Senior Professional Title Examination, overall and by item type. Methods: Between August and September 2025, we randomly selected 100 multiple-choice questions from the official Chinese Ultrasound Medicine Senior Professional Title Examination bank (60 image-based interpretation items and 40 text-based items). We evaluated ChatGPT-5 and DeepSeek using identical prompts through their public web interfaces. The primary outcome was overall accuracy; secondary outcomes were accuracy by item type and subspecialty. Between-model differences were assessed using two-proportion Results: Overall accuracy was higher for ChatGPT-5 than for DeepSeek [74.0% (74/100) vs. 60.0% (60/100); Conclusions: ChatGPT-5 outperformed DeepSeek on image-based items (61.7% vs. 40.0%), while both models performed similarly on text-based knowledge items (92.5% vs. 90.0%). Overall, both LLMs showed strong performance on Chinese ultrasound senior-title examination questions, with complementary strengths across content areas. They may be useful as supplementary educational tools, but further advances in multimodal reasoning are needed to support more reliable image interpretation.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceChatGPT-5DeepSeekmedical educationprofessional title examinationultrasound medicine

Identifiers

PMID41808913
PMCPMC12968994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.