Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 6, 2026

Augmenting Large Language Models via Vector Embeddings to Improve Domain-Specific Responsiveness
Published on: December 6, 2024
Enabling interoperability across disparate health data sources using Large Language Models
Obinwa Ozonze1, Ogechukwu Okonor2, Uzondu Dike3
1School of Computing, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, Hampshire, United Kingdom.
Abstract:
The heterogeneity of health data systems remains a major barrier to interoperability and data integration, and a challenge for clinical decision support and AI-driven research. The coexistence of multiple Common Data Models (CDMs) complicates integration, requiring complex manual or rule-based schema mapping, which is labor-intensive, error-prone, and difficult to scale. We evaluated three leading Large Language Models (LLMs): ChatGPT, Gemini, and DeepSeek, for their ability to match data elements from four widely used CDMs (PCORnet, OMOP, Sentinel, and i2b2) to FHIR R4 via web-based chat interfaces. Reference mappings from the HL7 Common Data Models Harmonization Implementation Guide were used as the benchmark. Standardized prompts were submitted across 36 total runs (3 LLMs × 4 schemas × 3 repetitions), and accuracy was measured using F1-scores with 95% confidence intervals, alongside strict (AND) and relaxed (OR) match criteria. DeepSeek obtained the highest numerical mean F1-scores (0.78-0.99) with strong consistency (AND Match = 0.87). Gemini showed good coverage (OR Match = 0.96) but greater variability (AND Match = 0.64), while ChatGPT achieved moderate accuracy with lower consistency (AND Match = 0.51). A two-way ANOVA indicated no statistically significant differences by LLM type (p = 0.138), CDM schema (p = 0.194), or their interaction (p = 0.451). Performance varied by domain, with Demographics and Condition mapped most accurately, while Observation showed the highest error rates (44% of total errors). Out of 2,583 total matchings, 314 errors were observed and categorized into four failure patterns: semantic confusion (42%), structural misalignment (28%), ambiguous terminology (18%), and terminology variance (12%). This study demonstrates the feasibility of using LLMs to automate health data integration as a complementary approach to traditional ontology-based methods, particularly for well-structured, context-rich CDMs. However, safe deployment requires human-in-the-loop validation, governance, prompt optimization, metadata integration, and validation to ensure clinical and research reliability.
