MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205170951 · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocab220

Evaluation of the International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI) in the coding of common surgical procedures

2021· article· en· W3205170951 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Health Information
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineIntramural Research ProgramNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSNOMED CTCoding (social sciences)Psychological interventionConcordanceMedicineElectronic health recordEuropean unionComputer scienceStatisticsInternal medicineMathematicsTerminologyHealth careBusinessNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI) in the clinical and statistical use cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 300 most-performed surgical procedures as represented by their display names in an electronic health record. For comparison with existing coding systems, we coded the procedures in ICHI, SNOMED CT, International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10-PCS, and CCI (Canadian Classification of Health Interventions), using postcoordination (modification of existing codes by adding other codes), when applicable. Failure analysis was done for cases where full representation was not achieved. The ICHI encoding was further evaluated for adequacy to support statistical reporting by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and European Union (EU) categories of surgical procedures. RESULTS: After deduplication, 229 distinct procedures remained. Without postcoordination, ICHI achieved full representation in 52.8%. A further 19.2% could be fully represented with postcoordination. SNOMED CT was the best performing overall, with 94.3% full representation without postcoordination, and 99.6% with postcoordination. Failure analysis showed that "method" and "target" constituted most of the missing information for ICHI encoding. For all OECD/EU surgical categories, ICHI coding was adequate to support statistical reporting. One OECD/EU category ("Hip replacement, secondary") required postcoordination for correct assignment. CONCLUSION: In the clinical use case of capturing information in the electronic health record, ICHI was outperformed by the clinically oriented procedure coding systems (SNOMED CT and CCI), but was comparable to ICD-10-PCS. Postcoordination could be an effective and efficient means of improving coverage. ICHI is generally adequate for the collection of international statistics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.275
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it