Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42643380›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026

Comparative assessment of DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4 for structured ultrasound reporting of adnexal masses.

Mengjuan Zhang, Bin Wang, Ran Li, Xinwu Cui, Xiaofeng Zhang, Jingzhe Wang, Lan Jia, Lijuan Guo, Yan Kong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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

9 authors.

Mengjuan ZhangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Bin WangDepartment of Respiratory Intensive Care, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Ran LiDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Xinwu CuiDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College and State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Severe Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Xiaofeng ZhangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College and State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Severe Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Jingzhe WangDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Lan JiaDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Lijuan GuoDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Yan KongDepartment of Medical Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, Henan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study primarily evaluated the ability of two large language models (DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4) to generate structured ultrasound reports from free-text adnexal mass reports. Secondarily, we assessed their accuracy in O-RADS classification and management recommendations, with an exploratory analysis of their performance in benign versus malignant discrimination. Methods: This study included 215 free-text ultrasound reports of adnexal masses (AMs) between July 2024 and March 2025. Each report was processed three times per model; majority voting was used to determine the final output. Three senior radiologists, blinded to model identity, evaluated structured reports against a predefined template, O-RADS categories, and management guidelines. Histopathology served as the reference standard for benign/malignant discrimination; while expert consensus served as the reference for the other endpoints. Results: GPT-4 showed numerically better performance than DeepSeek-R1 in generating structured reports (99.5% vs. 96.7%, p = 0.07).DeepSeek-R1 outperformed GPT-4 in O-RADS accuracy (64.4% vs. 52.9%, p < 0.001) and appropriate management recommendations (66.4% vs. 58.0%, p = 0.007). Both models demonstrated good discrimination ability for benign versus malignant classification (AUC > 0.80 for both). Conclusion: Both DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4 demonstrate potential for automating structured ultrasound reporting of AMs, with DeepSeek-R1 showing superior performance in classification and recommendations. However, their diagnostic performance in discriminating benign from malignant masses, while promising, requires further refinement before independent clinical application. These findings support their role as assistive tools, pending integration with image data and prospective validation.

Indexed as

adnexal massesDeepSeek-R1GPT-4structured reportsultrasound diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID42643380
PMCPMC13503586

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.