Observational studyBMC health services research2020
Feasibility of coding-based Charlson comorbidity index for hospitalized patients in China, a representative developing country.
Observational study in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficiency and cost-effectiveness of three surgical strategies for primary osteoarthritis of the elbow: a multicenter propensity score-weighted cohort study.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Association of multimorbidity with mortality risk in Chinese senior adults: a population-based cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Developing machine learning-driven acute kidney injury predictive models using non-standard EMRs in resource-limited settings.Medical physics · 2025Observational
- Optimising the paradigms of human AI collaborative clinical coding.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of real-world clinical and economic outcomes in patients receiving oral anticoagulants: A retrospective claims analysis.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2022Observational
- Epidemiology of hospitalizations due to pesticide intoxication-associated acute kidney injury in China.International urology and nephrology · 2022Article
- Burden of chronic disease comorbidities among cancer patients at Queen Elizabeth and Kamuzu Central Hospitals in Malawi: an exploratory cross-sectional study.The Pan African medical journal · 2021Article
- Clinical features, risk factors, and clinical burden of acute kidney injury in older adults.Renal failure · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) can be automatically calculated from the International Classification of Disease (ICD) code. However, the feasibility of this transformation has not been acknowledged, particularly in hospitals without a qualified ICD coding system. Here, we investigated the utility of coding-based CCI in China.
methodsA multi-center, population-based, retrospective observational study was conducted, using a dataset incorporating 2,464,395 adult subjects from 15 hospitals. CCI was calculated using both ICD-10-based and diagnosis-based method, according to the transformation rule reported previously and to the literal description from discharge diagnosis, respectively. A κ coefficient of variation was used as a measure of agreement between the above two methods for each hospital. The discriminative abilities of the two methods were compared using the receiver-of-operating characteristic curve (ROC) for prediction of in-hospital mortality.
resultsTotal agreement between the ICD-based and diagnosis-based CCI for each index ranged from 86.1 to 100%, with κ coefficients from 0.210 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.208-0.212] to 0.932 (95% CI 0.924-0.940). None of the 19 indices of CCI had a κ coefficient > 0.75 in all the hospitals included for study. The area under the curve of ROC for in-hospital mortality of all 15 hospitals was significantly lower for ICD-based than diagnosis-based CCI [0.735 (0.732, 0.739) vs 0.760 (0.757, 0.764)], indicative of more limited discriminative ability of the ICD-based calculation.
conclusionsCCI calculated using ICD-10 coding did not agree with diagnosis-based CCI. ICD-based CCI displayed diminished discrimination performance in terms of in-hospital mortality, indicating that this method is not promising for CCI scoring in China under the present circumstances.
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.