ReviewJournal of medical signals and sensors2025
Artificial Intelligence-based Automated International Classification of Diseases Coding: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of medical signals and sensors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for automated ICD-10 coding: a systematic review of multi-label text classification in clinical narratives.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- Predicting Hospital Length of Stay in Orthopedic Trauma Patients Using Fracture-Specific Machine Learning Models: A Multicenter Retrospective Prediction-Modeling Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Automated clinical coding, facilitated by artificial intelligence (AI) techniques like natural language processing and machine learning, has emerged as a promising approach to enhance coding efficiency and accuracy in healthcare. This review synthesizes current knowledge about AI-based automated coding of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), with a focus on its challenges, benefits, and future research directions. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases on January 1, 2024. Studies discussing challenges, advantages, and research gaps in AI-driven ICD coding were included. Out of 12,641 identified records, eight studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies highlighted six key challenges: extensive label space, imbalanced label distribution, lengthy documents, coding interpretability issues, ethical concerns, and lack of transparency. Ten major benefits of AI-based ICD coding were identified, including improved decision-making, data standardization, and increased coding accuracy. In addition, eight future directions were proposed, emphasizing interdisciplinary collaboration, transfer learning, transparency enhancement, and active learning techniques. Despite significant challenges, AI-based ICD coding holds substantial potential to revolutionize clinical coding by improving efficiency and accuracy. This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of current evidence and actionable insights for advancing research and practical implementation of automated ICD coding systems.
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.