Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31553307›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2019

Mapping ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM Codes to Phecodes: Workflow Development and Initial Evaluation.

Patrick Wu, Aliya Gifford, Xiangrui Meng, Xue Li, Harry Campbell, Tim Varley, Juan Zhao, Robert Carroll, Lisa Bastarache, Joshua C Denny and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 361 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
361citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

361 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

301 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Patrick Wu *Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1437-6688
Aliya Gifford *Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8931-8362
Xiangrui Meng *Centre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4889-4640
Xue LiCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6880-2577
Harry CampbellCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6169-6262
Tim VarleyPublic Health and Intelligence Strategic Business Unit, National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6106-568X
Juan ZhaoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1429-0662
Robert CarrollDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3802-8183
Lisa BastaracheDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3020-447X
Joshua C DennyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3049-7332
Evropi TheodoratouCentre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5887-9132
Wei-Qi WeiDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4985-056X

Funding

MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007347 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAMS, CHRISTOPHER S. · 1985 to 2023
$26.3M
Vanderbilt Biomedical Informatics Training ProgramT15LM007450 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Jessica S. Ancker, Bradley A. Malin · 2002 to 2026
$19.7M
Understanding and preventing HLA-associated drug reactionsP50GM115305 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI PHILLIPS, ELIZABETH · 2015 to 2019
$13.0M
From GWAS to PheWAS: Scanning the EMR Phenome for Gene-disease AssociationsR01LM010685 · NLM · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI BASTARACHE, LISA · 2011 to 2022
$6.3M
Medical Scientist Training ProgramT32GM152284 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Christopher S. Williams · 2024 to 2026
$4.8M
Exploring Statin Pleiotropic Effects within a Very Large EHR Cohort - Diversity SupplementR01HL133786 · NHLBI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI WEI, WEI-QI · 2017 to 2020
$1.7M
Cancer Research UK 22804NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL133786NIGMS NIH HHS P50 GM115305NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007347NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM152284NLM NIH HHS R01 LM010685NLM NIH HHS T15 LM007450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe phecode system was built upon the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) for phenome-wide association studies (PheWAS) using the electronic health record (EHR).

objectiveThe goal of this paper was to develop and perform an initial evaluation of maps from the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) and the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes to phecodes.

methodsWe mapped ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM codes to phecodes using a number of methods and resources, such as concept relationships and explicit mappings from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Unified Medical Language System, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms, and the National Library of Medicine. We assessed the coverage of the maps in two databases: Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) using ICD-10-CM and the UK Biobank (UKBB) using ICD-10. We assessed the fidelity of the ICD-10-CM map in comparison to the gold-standard ICD-9-CM phecode map by investigating phenotype reproducibility and conducting a PheWAS.

resultsWe mapped >75% of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM codes to phecodes. Of the unique codes observed in the UKBB (ICD-10) and VUMC (ICD-10-CM) cohorts, >90% were mapped to phecodes. We observed 70-75% reproducibility for chronic diseases and <10% for an acute disease for phenotypes sourced from the ICD-10-CM phecode map. Using the ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM maps, we conducted a PheWAS with a Lipoprotein(a) genetic variant, rs10455872, which replicated two known genotype-phenotype associations with similar effect sizes: coronary atherosclerosis (ICD-9-CM: P<.001; odds ratio (OR) 1.60 [95% CI 1.43-1.80] vs ICD-10-CM: P<.001; OR 1.60 [95% CI 1.43-1.80]) and chronic ischemic heart disease (ICD-9-CM: P<.001; OR 1.56 [95% CI 1.35-1.79] vs ICD-10-CM: P<.001; OR 1.47 [95% CI 1.22-1.77]).

conclusionsThis study introduces the beta versions of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM to phecode maps that enable researchers to leverage accumulated ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM data for PheWAS in the EHR.

Indexed as

data scienceelectronic health recordgenome-wide association studymedical informatics applicationsphenome-wide association studyphenotyping

Identifiers

PMID31553307
PMCPMC6911227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.