Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 5, 2026

Treating Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Patients with Multicolumn-lead Spinal Cord Stimulation
Published on: June 26, 2018
Generative AI in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis care: A NASS guideline-compliant comparative analysis of ChatGPT
Meng Zhang1, Jiameng Li1, Yaluo Zhou1
1Orthopedics Third Inpatient Ward, The Fourth Hospital of Changsha (Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Hospital of Changsha), Changsha, China.
Abstract:
BackgroundThis study aims to compare the performance of two artificial intelligence (AI) models, ChatGPT-4.0 and DeepSeek-R1, in addressing clinical questions related to degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) using the North American Spine Society (NASS) guidelines as the benchmark.Methods15 clinical questions spanning five domains (diagnostic criteria, non-surgical management, surgical indications, perioperative care, and emerging controversies) were designed based on the 2013 NASS evidence-based clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of DLSS. Responses from both models were independently evaluated by two board-certified spine surgeons across four metrics: accuracy, completeness, supplementality, and misinformation. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using Cohen's κ coefficient, while Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests were employed to analyze statistical differences between models.ResultsDeepSeek-R1 demonstrated superior performance over ChatGPT-4.0 in accuracy (median score: 3 vs 2, P = 0.009), completeness (2 vs 1, P = 0.010), and supplementality (2 vs 1, P = 0.018). Both models exhibited comparable performance in avoiding misinformation (P = 0.671). DeepSeek-R1 achieved higher inter-rater agreement in accuracy (κ = 0.727 vs 0.615), whereas ChatGPT-4.0 showed stronger consistency in ssupplementality (κ = 0.792 vs 0.762).ConclusionsWhile both AI models demonstrate potential for clinical decision support, DeepSeek-R1 aligns more closely with NASS guidelines. ChatGPT-4.0 excels in providing supplementary insights but exhibits variability in accuracy. These findings underscore the need for domain-specific optimization of AI models to enhance reliability in medical applications.

