Breaking ICD Codes: Identifying Ambiguous Respiratory Infection Codes via Regional Diagnosis Heterogeneity.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Annals of Family Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1370/afm.3192
Marcin Piotr Walkowiak, Dariusz Walkowiak, Jarosław Walkowiak
{"title":"Breaking ICD Codes: Identifying Ambiguous Respiratory Infection Codes via Regional Diagnosis Heterogeneity.","authors":"Marcin Piotr Walkowiak, Dariusz Walkowiak, Jarosław Walkowiak","doi":"10.1370/afm.3192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to analyze regional variations in the assignment of <i>International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision</i> (ICD-10) codes to acute respiratory infections, seeking to identify notable anomalies that suggest diverse diagnoses of the same condition.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed national weekly diagnosis data for acute respiratory infections (ICD-10 codes J00-J22) in Poland from 2010 to 2019, covering all 380 county-equivalent administrative regions and encompassing 292 million consultations. Data were aggregated into age brackets. We calculated the Kendall tau correlations between shares of particular diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found staggering differences across regions in applied diagnoses that persisted even after disaggregating the data into age groups. The differences did not seem to stem from different levels of health care use, as there was no consistent pattern suggesting variability in milder diagnoses. Instead, there were numerous pairs of strongly negatively correlated codes implying classification ambiguity, with the most problematic diagnosis being J06 (acute upper respiratory infections of multiple and unspecified sites), which was used almost interchangeably with a diverse range of others, especially J00 (common cold) and J20 (bronchitis).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study using observable anomalies to analyze regional coding variability for the same respiratory infection. Although some of these discrepancies may raise concerns about misdiagnosis, the majority of cases involving interchangeably used codes did not seem to substantially impact treatment or prognosis. This suggests that ICD codes may have clinical ambiguities and could face challenges not only in fulfilling their intended purpose of generating internationally comparable health data but also in their use for comprehensive government health planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"23 1","pages":"9-15"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11772040/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3192","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to analyze regional variations in the assignment of International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes to acute respiratory infections, seeking to identify notable anomalies that suggest diverse diagnoses of the same condition.

Methods: We analyzed national weekly diagnosis data for acute respiratory infections (ICD-10 codes J00-J22) in Poland from 2010 to 2019, covering all 380 county-equivalent administrative regions and encompassing 292 million consultations. Data were aggregated into age brackets. We calculated the Kendall tau correlations between shares of particular diagnoses.

Results: We found staggering differences across regions in applied diagnoses that persisted even after disaggregating the data into age groups. The differences did not seem to stem from different levels of health care use, as there was no consistent pattern suggesting variability in milder diagnoses. Instead, there were numerous pairs of strongly negatively correlated codes implying classification ambiguity, with the most problematic diagnosis being J06 (acute upper respiratory infections of multiple and unspecified sites), which was used almost interchangeably with a diverse range of others, especially J00 (common cold) and J20 (bronchitis).

Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study using observable anomalies to analyze regional coding variability for the same respiratory infection. Although some of these discrepancies may raise concerns about misdiagnosis, the majority of cases involving interchangeably used codes did not seem to substantially impact treatment or prognosis. This suggests that ICD codes may have clinical ambiguities and could face challenges not only in fulfilling their intended purpose of generating internationally comparable health data but also in their use for comprehensive government health planning.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Family Medicine
Annals of Family Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.50%
发文量
142
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Annals of Family Medicine is a peer-reviewed research journal to meet the needs of scientists, practitioners, policymakers, and the patients and communities they serve.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of a Program Designed to Support Implementation of Prescribing Medication for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in Primary Care Practices. Evaluation of an AI-Based Voice Biomarker Tool to Detect Signals Consistent With Moderate to Severe Depression. For AI in Primary Care, Start With the Problem. Primary Care Physicians' Responses to Treatment Burden in People With Type 2 Diabetes: A Qualitative Video Analysis in China. The AI Moonshot: What We Need and What We Do Not.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1