ArticleRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2026
[ICD
Article in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: > To compare concordance between physicians and coders in their assignment of diagnoses under International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11). Methods: A pilot study was conducted at San Juan de Dios Hospital in Curicó, Chile, between March and June 2025, incorporating ICD-11 coding into the clinical services of internal medicine and psychiatry. Eight physicians and two coders were trained in the use of ICD-11, and the domestically developed "Deisy CIE-11" platform was used to validate diagnoses. A total of 457 hospital discharges were analyzed, comparing diagnostic coding performed by physicians, coders, and a national reference expert. Results: For the principal diagnoses, concordance was 96% (439/457) between physicians and coders and 93% (424/457) between physicians and the national reference expert. For secondary diagnoses, concordance exceeded 90% in all fields evaluated. Cohen's kappa coefficient for concordance between physicians and coders was 0.963. The main errors were associated with omissions in postcoordination and incorrect assignment of the external cause code. The national reference expert reviewed 100% of the records for which information was available. Conclusions: The pilot study demonstrated a high level of diagnostic concordance among physicians, coders, and the national reference expert in the assignment of diagnostic codes to hospital discharges. However, significant gaps were identified in postcoordination, the recording of external causes, and the standardization of review criteria. These findings provide preliminary evidence to inform future strategies for implementing ICD-11 in hospital morbidity coding.
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.