Skip to content
Review Open access

184 Evaluating Reasoning-Tuned Large Language Models for Clinical Decision-Making in Spine Surgery

Jul 2026 · British Journal of Surgery · Vol 113 · 0 citations

TL;DR

OpenAI o1 (full) produced more accurate, thorough, appropriate, and clear plans, with greater consistency, while DeepSeek R1 showed credible but more variable outputs.

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 are designed to move beyond factual recall by modelling deliberative thought processes. Their performance in complex spine scenarios remains unclear. This study evaluates whether reasoning-tuned LLMs can generate coherent and clinically relevant management plans when assessed by fellowship-trained spine surgeons. Eleven synthetic case vignettes were presented to OpenAI o1 (full) and DeepSeek R1 with identical prompts requesting diagnostic impression, reasoning, and management plan. Outputs were anonymised and randomised for blind review. Eight fellowship-trained spine surgeons [five consultants, three fellows] from the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Nigeria, and Zambia scored diagnostic accuracy, reasoning, surgical plan appropriateness, and clarity on five-point Likert scales. Eighty-six paired evaluations were analysed using two-tailed paired t-tests with Bonferroni correction, adjusted α=0.0125. OpenAI o1 (full) outperformed DeepSeek R1 across all domains. Means [Standard Deviation] and p values were diagnostic accuracy 4.57 [0.60] vs 4.31 [0.79], p < 0.001, reasoning and thoroughness 4.48 [0.68] vs 4.23 [0.75], p = 0.005, surgical plan appropriateness 4.33 [0.76] vs 4.06 [0.86], p = 0.010, clarity 4.47 [0.68] vs 4.15 [0.85], p < 0.001. All comparisons met the corrected significance threshold, and o1 showed lower standard deviations, which signals more consistent quality across raters and cases. Reasoning-tuned LLMs can emulate elements of expert surgical decision-making. OpenAI o1 (full) produced more accurate, thorough, appropriate, and clear plans, with greater consistency, while DeepSeek R1 showed credible but more variable outputs. Transparent validation and reporting remain essential before clinical use.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Jul 2026

The illusion of competence: Evaluating the clinical reasoning of large language models in pediatric gastroenterology.

While current LLMs demonstrate good diagnostic pattern recognition in PGHN, reproducible and potentially life-threatening failures in pharmacological reasoning and reference accuracy create a dangerous illusion of competence.

Y. Ergen, S. Teke, E. G. Başaran et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Multimodal Large Language Models vs. Medical Doctors in Degenerative Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Decision Concordance Study of 147 Patients

Off-the-shelf multimodal LLMs approximate human performance for binary surgical indication but remain inferior for precise level localization, establish a practice-relevant baseline of spatial reasoning limitations for tools already used by patients and junior doctors.

M. Hamdan, A. Harati, A. Al-bakheet et al. · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

A multidimensional benchmarking framework for large language models in oncologic decision making

A multi-dimensional evaluation framework integrating clinical quality and operational efficiency provides more actionable insights than single metric assessments, enabling pragmatic model selection for oncology practice.

M. Halıcı, Serkan Saltürk, Irem Sayin et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Evaluating large language models in patient education: a comparative analysis addressing frequently asked questions in peri-acetabular osteotomy.

There may be significant differences in how effectively LLMs support patients with surgical queries, particularly in areas needing detailed explanation, and usually required minimal clarification in areas needing detailed explanation.

T. Davis, B. Guevel, K. Logishetty et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Large language models in spine care and research.

This review highlights the promise of LLMs in enhancing decision support, workflow efficiency, research productivity, and patient communication in spine care, while emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary collaboration, robust evaluation metrics, and governance frameworks that prioritize patient safety and equity.

Fabio Galbusera, Andrea Cina · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.