ArticleJMIR medical informatics2026
Automated ICD-10-Anchored Classification of Primary Care Text Data: Development and Evaluation of a Custom Multilabel Classifier.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Correction: Automated ICD-10-Anchored Classification of Primary Care Text Data: Development and Evaluation of a Custom Multilabel Classifier.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Electronic medical records are a vast and valuable source of information, useful for tasks such as estimating disease prevalence. However, in routine primary care, much of this information is in free-text format rather than in a structured form and, therefore, not readily amenable to analysis. Manual coding of this textual data is both time-consuming and resource-intensive, making it impractical for large datasets. Although powerful open-source language models offer new opportunities for automated coding, their use on short heterogeneous primary care notes, particularly in German-language settings, remains insufficiently studied. Objective: By providing hands-on guidance for applied health researchers, this study aims to demonstrate the effective and accurate automatic classification of free-text notes using a language model fine-tuned for automated International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) coding. Methods: Building on the extensive Family Medicine Research Using Electronic Medical Records (FIRE) routine database from the Institute of Primary Care at the University Hospital Zurich and the University of Zurich, we trained a large language model-based multilabel classifier on a dataset of 38,728 free-text notes, which had been manually categorized into 47 classes using specific ICD-10 codes and code ranges or nondiagnostic/ad hoc labels (eg, "unclear diagnosis," "status post"). We stratified the labeled data into training (70%), validation (15%), and posttraining test (15%) sets, ensuring similar label distributions across these sets. Using the Transformers Python library, we trained the model over 10 epochs and evaluated it on the posttraining test dataset. Results: Across 48 classes, the FIRE classifier achieved strong performance on the held-out posttraining set, with F1-scores of 0.85 (micro, overall across all predictions), 0.86 (macro, mean of per-class scores treating classes equally), and 0.84 (weighted, per-class scores weighted by class frequency). Conclusions: This study demonstrates steps for training open-source large language models and highlights the potential to streamline and scale the extraction of diagnostic information for practical applications. Our model can be robustly deployed, for example, for prescreening and labeling of free-text information, thus potentially reducing the burden of repetitive and error-prone manual handling.
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.