MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413831744 · doi:10.1186/s12911-025-03121-5

New ICD-11 features for coding late sequelae and chronic post-procedural conditions

2025· review· en· W4413831744 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle A. Southern, Bastien Boussat, Marie‐Annick Le Pogam, William A. Ghali

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsHealth informaticsCoding (social sciences)ICD-10MedicineComputer sciencePublic healthNursingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many clinical circumstances in life where people live with chronic conditions (or states) that arose from either (1) a prior clinical diagnosis (e.g. a stroke) or (2) a prior healthcare-related event or medical procedure. Unfortunately, capturing such concepts is not straightforward in coded health data. This paper describes the coding rubric for sequelae (also often referred to as 'late effects') in the new ICD-11 coding system and some clinical coding examples. Earlier versions of ICD were constrained, in all but a few exceptions, by the need to combine all aspects of a clinical scenario into a single code. ICD-11 permits the clustering (postcoordination) of multiple codes to describe multifaceted clinical scenarios. This article features both precoordinated (single code) and postcoordinated (multi-code) descriptions of late effect situations where a prior health problem is the remote cause of current symptoms or conditions - i.e. sequelae. The late effect of a prior health problem rubric is yet another example of enhanced ICD-11 features that will improve future health information systems.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision MakingSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207