ArticleEpilepsia2026
Underutilization of syndrome-specific ICD-10 codes for genetic epilepsies: Implications for precision medicine.
Article in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Syndrome-specific International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes have the potential to improve identification of patients for precision therapies, clinical trials, and research, yet their real-world uptake is not well characterized. We evaluated the utilization of syndrome-specific ICD-10 codes at a large academic medical center among patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in 10 monogenic epilepsy genes with established codes (CDKL5, EHMT1, KCNQ2, MECP2, MED13L, SCN1A, SHANK3, SLC13A5, SLC2A1, SYNGAP1). Patients were identified from an institutional genetic testing database and were included if they had at least one clinical encounter after code implementation or genetic diagnosis. Variants of uncertain significance were manually curated, and Rett and Dravet phenotypes were reviewed for accuracy. Of 83 patients with qualifying variants, 39 met inclusion criteria. Only 56.4% (22/39) were ever assigned a syndrome-specific ICD-10 code, which appeared in 31.1% of encounters and accounted for 14.5% of all documented codes. Uptake varied by syndrome, provider specialty, and encounter type and increased over time. In the Dravet syndrome subgroup (n = 23), generic epilepsy codes were documented more than twice as often as the Dravet-specific code (G40.83). When G40.83 was documented, other epilepsy codes were used less frequently, suggesting it may be treated as a substitute for broader epilepsy codes. These findings demonstrate inconsistent and limited adoption of syndrome-specific ICD-10 codes, highlighting the need for improved coding support and integration of structured genetic data within the electronic health record.
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.