Performance of DeepSeek V3, DeepSeek R1, ChatGPT 4o, and ChatGPT o1 on the National Health Professional and Technical Qualification Examination (Intermediate Level) in China: Comparative Analysis (Preprint)
Preprint
- 1 January 2026
- preprint
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Preprints
Abstract
BACKGROUND In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have undergone swift cycles of refinement and iteration. However, in the realm of clinical medicine, different LLMs' capability of logical reasoning and disease diagnosis needs further investigation. OBJECTIVE The aim of our study was to evaluate the performance of 4 different LLMs in the National Health Professional and Technical Qualification Examination in China. METHODS A total of 398 multiple-choice questions of 5 different question types were integrated within the examination with respect to the diagnosis or care of cases. These questions were categorized into different cardiology subspecialties and different clinical disciplines. DeepSeek V3 and R1 were accessed through an application programming interface, while ChatGPT 4o and o1 were queried via its public chat-based interface. We offered the same prompts instructing LLMs to assume the role of a physician and provide answers with explanations at the beginning of each conversation. We assessed different LLMs’ performance by the accuracy in the responses to the multiple-choice questions. For the first 3 examination sections, McNemar test was used to compare the accuracy among the models, with post hoc pairwise comparisons performed using partitions of chi-square method and Bonferroni correction (significance set at P<.008). For the fourth section involving partially credit scoring, one-way ANOVA was performed to compare the mean scores among the models, with statistical significance set at P<.05. RESULTS Both DeepSeek V3 and R1 showed superior performance in the first 3 sections of the Chinese National Health Professional and Technical Qualification Examination, achieving an overall performance of 93% and 93.6%, respectively. ChatGPT 4o and o1 achieved accuracies of 73.3% and 69%, respectively (all P<.001 compared with DeepSeek V3). For the fourth section, the performance of all 4 LLMs markedly declined compared to their results in the preceding sections. Particularly, in the section of gastroenterology and hematology, DeepSeek V3 achieved the highest accuracy, while R1 ranked first in cardiology and neurology. ChatGPT o1 achieved the highest accuracy in the topic of coronary artery disease, with no statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS DeepSeek V3 and R1 showed remarkable potential in facilitating clinical decision-making in the Chinese professional examination, with both outperforming ChatGPT 4o and o1. Nonetheless, future research should continue evaluating their economic efficiency and susceptibility to hallucination.Keywords
All Related Versions
- Published version: JMIR Formative Research, 10, e90673.
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- DeepSeek-R1 outperforms Gemini 2.0 Pro, OpenAI o1, and o3-mini in bilingual complex ophthalmology reasoningAdvances in Ophthalmology Practice and Research, 2025
- DeepSeek versus ChatGPT: Multimodal artificial intelligence revolutionizing scientific discovery. From language editing to autonomous content generation—Redefining innovation in research and practiceKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2025
- Lowering systolic blood pressure to less than 120 mm Hg versus less than 140 mm Hg in patients with high cardiovascular risk with and without diabetes or previous stroke: an open-label, blinded-outcome, randomised trialThe Lancet, 2024
- Testing ChatGPT ability to answer laypeople questions about cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitationResuscitation, 2023
- Evaluating the Clinical Decision-Making Ability of Large Language Models Using MKSAP-19 Cardiology QuestionsJACC: Advances, 2023
- Can novel multimodal chatbots such as Bing Chat Enterprise, ChatGPT-4 Pro, and Google Bard correctly interpret electrocardiogram images?Resuscitation, 2023
- Performance and exploration of ChatGPT in medical examination, records and education in Chinese: Pave the way for medical AIInternational Journal of Medical Informatics, 2023
- Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientistsNature, 2023
- Google DeepMind and healthcare in an age of algorithmsHealth and Technology, 2017
- Enhancing Clinical Decision Making: Development of a Contiguous Definition and Conceptual FrameworkJournal of Professional Nursing, 2014