Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36932733›Full record

ArticleGlobal spine journal2024

Can a Novel Natural Language Processing Model and Artificial Intelligence Automatically Generate Billing Codes From Spine Surgical Operative Notes?

Bashar Zaidat, Justin Tang, Varun Arvind, Eric A Geng, Brian Cho, Akiro H Duey, Calista Dominy, Kiehyun D Riew, Samuel K Cho, Jun S Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
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

10 authors.

Bashar ZaidatDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8823-720X
Justin TangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4544-3262
Varun ArvindDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Eric A GengDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0736-3245
Brian ChoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Akiro H DueyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0308-0512
Calista DominyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6572-585X
Kiehyun D RiewDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical Center- Och Spine Hospital, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0718-3423
Samuel K ChoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Jun S KimDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designRetrospective cohort.

objectiveBilling and coding-related administrative tasks are a major source of healthcare expenditure in the United States. We aim to show that a second-iteration Natural Language Processing (NLP) machine learning algorithm, XLNet, can automate the generation of CPT codes from operative notes in ACDF, PCDF, and CDA procedures.

methodsWe collected 922 operative notes from patients who underwent ACDF, PCDF, or CDA from 2015 to 2020 and included CPT codes generated by the billing code department. We trained XLNet, a generalized autoregressive pretraining method, on this dataset and tested its performance by calculating AUROC and AUPRC.

resultsThe performance of the model approached human accuracy. Trial 1 (ACDF) achieved an AUROC of .82 (range: .48-.93), an AUPRC of .81 (range: .45-.97), and class-by-class accuracy of 77% (range: 34%-91%); trial 2 (PCDF) achieved an AUROC of .83 (.44-.94), an AUPRC of .70 (.45-.96), and class-by-class accuracy of 71% (42%-93%); trial 3 (ACDF and CDA) achieved an AUROC of .95 (.68-.99), an AUPRC of .91 (.56-.98), and class-by-class accuracy of 87% (63%-99%); trial 4 (ACDF, PCDF, CDA) achieved an AUROC of .95 (.76-.99), an AUPRC of .84 (.49-.99), and class-by-class accuracy of 88% (70%-99%).

conclusionsWe show that the XLNet model can be successfully applied to orthopedic surgeon's operative notes to generate CPT billing codes. As NLP models as a whole continue to improve, billing can be greatly augmented with artificial intelligence assisted generation of CPT billing codes which will help minimize error and promote standardization in the process.

Indexed as

ACDFartificial intelligencecervicaldisc replacementfusionnatural language processingPCDF

Identifiers

PMID36932733
PMCPMC11418703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.