Improvements in Neoplasm Classification in the International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision: Systematic Comparative Study With the Chinese Clinical Modification of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision.

IF 1.9 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Yicong Xu, Jingya Zhou, Hongxia Li, Dong Cai, Huanbing Zhu, Shengdong Pan
{"title":"Improvements in Neoplasm Classification in the International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision: Systematic Comparative Study With the Chinese Clinical Modification of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision.","authors":"Yicong Xu, Jingya Zhou, Hongxia Li, Dong Cai, Huanbing Zhu, Shengdong Pan","doi":"10.2196/52296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11) improved neoplasm classification.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to study the alterations in the ICD-11 compared to the Chinese Clinical Modification of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10-CCM) for neoplasm classification and to provide evidence supporting the transition to the ICD-11.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We downloaded public data files from the World Health Organization and the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. The ICD-10-CCM neoplasm codes were manually recoded with the ICD-11 coding tool, and an ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 mapping table was generated. The existing files and the ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 mapping table were used to compare the coding, classification, and expression features of neoplasms between the ICD-10-CCM and ICD-11.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ICD-11 coding structure for neoplasms has dramatically changed. It provides advantages in coding granularity, coding capacity, and expression flexibility. In total, 27.4% (207/755) of ICD-10 codes and 38% (1359/3576) of ICD-10-CCM codes underwent grouping changes, which was a significantly different change (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>1</sub>=30.3; P<.001). Notably, 67.8% (2424/3576) of ICD-10-CCM codes could be fully represented by ICD-11 codes. Another 7% (252/3576) could be fully described by uniform resource identifiers. The ICD-11 had a significant difference in expression ability among the 4 ICD-10-CCM groups (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>3</sub>=93.7; P<.001), as well as a considerable difference between the changed and unchanged groups (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>1</sub>=74.7; P<.001). Expression ability negatively correlated with grouping changes (r=-.144; P<.001). In the ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 mapping table, 60.5% (2164/3576) of codes were postcoordinated. The top 3 postcoordinated results were specific anatomy (1907/3576, 53.3%), histopathology (201/3576, 5.6%), and alternative severity 2 (70/3576, 2%). The expression ability of postcoordination was not fully reflected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ICD-11 includes many improvements in neoplasm classification, especially the new coding system, improved expression ability, and good semantic interoperability. The transition to the ICD-11 will inevitably bring challenges for clinicians, coders, policy makers and IT technicians, and many preparations will be necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":51757,"journal":{"name":"Interactive Journal of Medical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10960217/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interactive Journal of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/52296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11) improved neoplasm classification.

Objective: We aimed to study the alterations in the ICD-11 compared to the Chinese Clinical Modification of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10-CCM) for neoplasm classification and to provide evidence supporting the transition to the ICD-11.

Methods: We downloaded public data files from the World Health Organization and the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. The ICD-10-CCM neoplasm codes were manually recoded with the ICD-11 coding tool, and an ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 mapping table was generated. The existing files and the ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 mapping table were used to compare the coding, classification, and expression features of neoplasms between the ICD-10-CCM and ICD-11.

Results: The ICD-11 coding structure for neoplasms has dramatically changed. It provides advantages in coding granularity, coding capacity, and expression flexibility. In total, 27.4% (207/755) of ICD-10 codes and 38% (1359/3576) of ICD-10-CCM codes underwent grouping changes, which was a significantly different change (χ21=30.3; P<.001). Notably, 67.8% (2424/3576) of ICD-10-CCM codes could be fully represented by ICD-11 codes. Another 7% (252/3576) could be fully described by uniform resource identifiers. The ICD-11 had a significant difference in expression ability among the 4 ICD-10-CCM groups (χ23=93.7; P<.001), as well as a considerable difference between the changed and unchanged groups (χ21=74.7; P<.001). Expression ability negatively correlated with grouping changes (r=-.144; P<.001). In the ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 mapping table, 60.5% (2164/3576) of codes were postcoordinated. The top 3 postcoordinated results were specific anatomy (1907/3576, 53.3%), histopathology (201/3576, 5.6%), and alternative severity 2 (70/3576, 2%). The expression ability of postcoordination was not fully reflected.

Conclusions: The ICD-11 includes many improvements in neoplasm classification, especially the new coding system, improved expression ability, and good semantic interoperability. The transition to the ICD-11 will inevitably bring challenges for clinicians, coders, policy makers and IT technicians, and many preparations will be necessary.

国际疾病分类》第十一次修订版在肿瘤分类方面的改进:与《国际疾病分类》第十版中文临床修订版的系统比较研究。
背景:国际疾病分类第十一次修订版(ICD-11)改进了肿瘤分类:国际疾病分类第十一次修订版(ICD-11)改进了肿瘤分类:我们旨在研究 ICD-11 与《国际疾病分类-中国临床修订版第十版》(ICD-10-CCM)相比在肿瘤分类方面的变化,并提供支持向 ICD-11 过渡的证据:我们从世界卫生组织和中华人民共和国国家卫生委员会下载了公共数据文件。我们使用 ICD-11 编码工具对 ICD-10-CCM 肿瘤代码进行了人工重新编码,并生成了 ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 映射表。利用现有文件和 ICD-10-CCM/ICD-11 映射表,比较了 ICD-10-CCM 和 ICD-11 对肿瘤的编码、分类和表达特征:结果:ICD-11 的肿瘤编码结构发生了巨大变化。它在编码粒度、编码能力和表达灵活性方面都具有优势。总共有27.4%(207/755)的ICD-10编码和38%(1359/3576)的ICD-10-CCM编码发生了分组变化,这是一个显著不同的变化(χ21=30.3;P23=93.7;P21=74.7;PC结论:ICD-11 在肿瘤分类方面有许多改进,尤其是新的编码系统、表达能力的提高和良好的语义互通性。向 ICD-11 过渡将不可避免地给临床医生、编码员、政策制定者和 IT 技术人员带来挑战,需要做许多准备工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Interactive Journal of Medical Research
Interactive Journal of Medical Research MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信