Commentary – From Mixtapes to Playlists: Evolving Options for Capturing Diagnoses in Canadian Physicians’ Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physician billing claims are rich sources of administrative health data. However, diagnostic codes in billing claims are drawn from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (WHO & International Conference for the Ninth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases 1977), which has not been updated by the World Health Organization in three decades. With its updated and expanded content and its digital tooling, the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) (WHO n.d.a.) could be considered for this purpose. Primary care practitioners have always found the ICD inadequate for their needs. This may change with ICD-11, with which the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC) (van Boven and Ten Napel 2021) is more closely aligned. ICD-11, ICPC and the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms present evolving options for capturing diagnoses in physician data.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".