Assessing GPT and DeepL for terminology translation in the medical domain: A comparative study on the human phenotype ontology

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch articleContributedpeer-review

Contributors

  • Richard Noll - , Goethe University Frankfurt a.M. (Author)
  • Alexandra Berger - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Dominik Kieu - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Tobias Mueller - , Justus Liebig University Giessen (Author)
  • Ferdinand O Bohmann - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Angelina Müller - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Svea Holtz - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Philipp Stoffers - , Hasso Plattner Institute (Author)
  • Sebastian Hoehl - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Oya Guengoeze - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Jan-Niklas Eckardt - , Department of Internal Medicine I, Else Kröner Fresenius Center for Digital Health, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden (Author)
  • Holger Storf - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)
  • Jannik Schaaf - , University Hospital Frankfurt (Author)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This paper presents a comparative study of two state-of-the-art language models, OpenAI's GPT and DeepL, in the context of terminology translation within the medical domain.

METHODS: This study was conducted on the human phenotype ontology (HPO), which is used in medical research and diagnosis. Medical experts assess the performance of both models on a set of 120 translated HPO terms and their 180 synonyms, employing a 4-point Likert scale (strongly agree = 1, agree = 2, disagree = 3, strongly disagree = 4). An independent reference translation from the HeTOP database was used to validate the quality of the translation.

RESULTS: The average Likert rating for the selected HPO terms was 1.29 for GPT-3.5 and 1.37 for DeepL. The quality of the translations was also found to be satisfactory for multi-word terms with greater ontological depth. The comparison with HeTOP revealed a high degree of similarity between the models' translations and the reference translations.

CONCLUSIONS: Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in the mean ratings between the two models, indicating their comparable performance in terms of translation quality. The study not only illustrates the potential of machine translation but also shows incomplete coverage of translated medical terminology. This underscores the relevance of this study for cross-lingual medical research. However, the evaluation methods need to be further refined, specific translation issues need to be addressed, and the sample size needs to be increased to allow for more generalizable conclusions.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Article number237
Number of pages8
JournalBMC medical informatics and decision making
Volume25
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2025
Peer-reviewedYes

External IDs

PubMedCentral PMC12220062
Scopus 105009889147

Keywords

Sustainable Development Goals

Keywords

  • Artificial intelligence, Controlled vocabulary, GPT, Translations