ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
An end-to-end system for explainable clinical coding across languages and diverse medical data sources.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThe International Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding system standardizes clinical texts to improve the information extraction process in healthcare and research. However, most existing automated coding systems operate as “black boxes”, highlighting the need for explainable approaches that offer transparency and interpretable solutions. In this work, we present an end-to-end system that provides explainable clinical coding predictions.
methodsWe develop a three-phase system for explainable clinical coding. In Phase 1, text spans potentially describing ICD codes are detected using different Named Entity Recognition (NER) models. Phase 2 applies a supervised text classification model with a confidence threshold, while low-confidence cases are classified in Phase 3 using a semantic similarity model built from ICD code descriptions and related keyphrases.
resultsThe system is evaluated on four corpora in Spanish and English, annotated with ICD codes from three variants (ICD-10-CM, ICD-10-PCS, and ICD-O-3) and their corresponding textual mentions. Overall, the system proves to be robust and competitive with state-of-the-art approaches, outperforming most of them and achieving an average F1-score improvement of 3.42%.
conclusionsThis study presents one of the most comprehensive evaluations of an explainable clinical coding system across languages and ICD variants. The proposed approach demonstrates strong robustness and generalization, effectively handling unseen codes as well as discontinuous and overlapping entities.
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.