ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2020
Construction of a semi-automatic ICD-10 coding system.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence to Improve Clinical Coding Practice in Scandinavia: Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Symptom Terminology Normalization in Traditional Chinese Medicine: Development and Evaluation of a 2-Stage Deep Learning Framework Based on Fine-Grained Semantic Classification.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Examining Primary Care Utilization and Distance Traveled for Care Among Medicaid-Insured Children in South Carolina.Journal of community health · 2025Article
- Domain-Specific Pretraining of NorDeClin-Bidirectional Encoder Representations From Transformers forJMIR AI · 2025Article
- Enhancing medical coding efficiency through domain-specific fine-tuned large language models.npj health systems · 2025Article
- Digitalising the past decades: automated ICD-10 coding of unstructured free text dermatological diagnoses.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Using natural language processing for automated classification of disease and to identify misclassified ICD codes in cardiac disease.European heart journal. Digital health · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Automating the overburdened clinical coding system: challenges and next steps.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Automated clinical coding: what, why, and where we are?NPJ digital medicine · 2022Review
- Electronic Health Record Data in Cancer Learning Health Systems: Challenges and Opportunities.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2022Review
- Comparison of different feature extraction methods for applicable automated ICD coding.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- Linking Free Text Documentation of Functioning and Disability to the ICF With Natural Language Processing.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2021Article
- Contextualizing Rural/Non-Rural Differences in Pediatric Primary Care Patterns in South Carolina: A Mixed-Methods Study.Family & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) has been widely used to describe the diagnosis information of patients. Automatic ICD-10 coding is important because manually assigning codes is expensive, time consuming and error prone. Although numerous approaches have been developed to explore automatic coding, few of them have been applied in practice. Our aim is to construct a practical, automatic ICD-10 coding machine to improve coding efficiency and quality in daily work.
methodsIn this study, we propose the use of regular expressions (regexps) to establish a correspondence between diagnosis codes and diagnosis descriptions in outpatient settings and at admission and discharge. The description models of the regexps were embedded in our upgraded coding system, which queries a diagnosis description and assigns a unique diagnosis code. Like most studies, the precision (P), recall (R), F-measure (F) and overall accuracy (A) were used to evaluate the system performance. Our study had two stages. The datasets were obtained from the diagnosis information on the homepage of the discharge medical record. The testing sets were from October 1, 2017 to April 30, 2018 and from July 1, 2018 to January 31, 2019.
resultsThe values of P were 89.27 and 88.38% in the first testing phase and the second testing phase, respectively, which demonstrate high precision. The automatic ICD-10 coding system completed more than 160,000 codes in 16 months, which reduced the workload of the coders. In addition, a comparison between the amount of time needed for manual coding and automatic coding indicated the effectiveness of the system-the time needed for automatic coding takes nearly 100 times less than manual coding.
conclusionsOur automatic coding system is well suited for the coding task. Further studies are warranted to perfect the description models of the regexps and to develop synthetic approaches to improve system performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.