ArticleJournal of medical systems2026
Open-Source Large Language Models Distilled DeepSeek-R1 Pose Challenges for On-Premises Clinical Deployment in Medical Diagnosis: A Comparative Study of Performance.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The open-source reasoning large language model DeepSeek-R1 is increasingly being used in hospitals, but its multiple parameter versions, especially the distilled models, have not been fully evaluated for diagnostic performance. To address this, paired comparisons were conducted using five DeepSeek-R1 models and their respective base models. The models were tested on a diagnostic dataset of 110 simulated clinical cases from open access data, covering internal medicine, surgery, neurology, gynecology, and pediatrics, and categorized by incidence (frequent, less frequent, rare). The models were tasked with generating five preliminary diagnoses based on clinical symptoms, and a response was considered correct if the accurate diagnosis was included in the five generated. The model pairings were DeepSeek-R1-8B vs. Llama3.1-8B, DeepSeek-R1-14B vs. Qwen2.5-14B, DeepSeek-R1-32B vs. Qwen2.5-32B, DeepSeek-R1-70B vs. Llama3.3-70B, and DeepSeek-R1-671B vs. DeepSeek-V3. All reasoning models except DeepSeek-R1-671B were distilled versions. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed using McNemar's test for discordant pairs, with a significance threshold of 0.01. The results showed that DeepSeek-R1-671B significantly outperformed DeepSeek-V3 (95.45% vs. 88.18%; p = 0.008), while DeepSeek-R1-8B underperformed relative to Llama3.1-8B (47.27% vs. 64.54%; p = 0.003). No significant differences were observed for the mid-sized models. Subgroup analyses based on incidence and clinical specialties further supported these conclusions. Qualitative analysis of the chain-of-thought outputs in incorrect cases revealed three universally prevalent error modes across distilled models: Reasoning drift, Red-Flag recognition failure, and diagnostic priority inversion. The study concludes that the DeepSeek-R1-671B shows potential for medical diagnosis, but distilled models do not exceed their base models. Based on simulated clinical cases, our results do not support deploying distilled models for text-based diagnostic tasks without further validation on real patient data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42062641What 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.