Assessing the Validity of Claims-Based Diagnostic Codes for Psychotic and Affective Disorders and the Influence of the Coding Transition from the ICD-9 to the ICD-10 in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Clinical Epidemiology Pub Date : 2025-07-10 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CLEP.S522618
Yen-Wen Wang, Chen-Chung Liu, Hsi-Chung Chen, Chi-Shin Wu, Jen-Hui Chan, Cheng-Che Chen, Wei-Lieh Huang, Shih-Cheng Liao, Tzung-Jeng Hwang, Wei J Chen
{"title":"Assessing the Validity of Claims-Based Diagnostic Codes for Psychotic and Affective Disorders and the Influence of the Coding Transition from the ICD-9 to the ICD-10 in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database.","authors":"Yen-Wen Wang, Chen-Chung Liu, Hsi-Chung Chen, Chi-Shin Wu, Jen-Hui Chan, Cheng-Che Chen, Wei-Lieh Huang, Shih-Cheng Liao, Tzung-Jeng Hwang, Wei J Chen","doi":"10.2147/CLEP.S522618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>No studies have validated psychiatric diseases diagnoses in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). We aimed to assess the interrater reliability of chart-review among psychiatrists, examine the validity of the diagnostic codes for psychotic disorders and affective diseases in the NHIRD against review-based diagnoses, and examine whether the change in the coding system from the ICD-9-CM to the ICD-10-CM affected the validity of the diagnostic codes.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The study participants were psychiatric inpatients aged 18 to 65 years who were admitted in 2015 and 2017, respectively, to the main and three branch hospitals of National Taiwan University Hospital. A chart review was conducted among 48 purposively selected inpatients with discharge diagnoses in five core categories to assess interrater reliability. This chart-review procedure was then used to generate diagnostic codes for a stratified sampling of 727 inpatients with discharge diagnoses in 12 diagnostic categories of psychotic disorders and affective disorders to examine the validity of the diagnostic codes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The intraclass correlation coefficient reliability of schizophrenia and three broad categories of diagnoses indicated good interrater reliability. The positive predictive value and sensitivity of common diagnoses in the narrow category (eg, schizophrenia) or the broad category (eg, psychotic disorders, bipolar disorders, and major depressive disorders) were high-performing (≥ 0.70), whereas those of the diagnoses of low prevalence were modest. The validity indices of claims-based diagnoses using the ICD-10-CM tended to be better than those using the ICD-9-CM.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This first-ever study validating psychiatric diagnoses in Taiwan's NHIRD using a structured chart review suggests that the diagnostic codes of narrow categories of schizophrenia or other broad categories are recommended for high-performing validity indices. Intensive training for the coding plus the specific details requested by the ICD-10 may increase the validity of the claims-based databases for psychotic and affective disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":10362,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"17 ","pages":"635-645"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12258254/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S522618","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: No studies have validated psychiatric diseases diagnoses in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). We aimed to assess the interrater reliability of chart-review among psychiatrists, examine the validity of the diagnostic codes for psychotic disorders and affective diseases in the NHIRD against review-based diagnoses, and examine whether the change in the coding system from the ICD-9-CM to the ICD-10-CM affected the validity of the diagnostic codes.

Patients and methods: The study participants were psychiatric inpatients aged 18 to 65 years who were admitted in 2015 and 2017, respectively, to the main and three branch hospitals of National Taiwan University Hospital. A chart review was conducted among 48 purposively selected inpatients with discharge diagnoses in five core categories to assess interrater reliability. This chart-review procedure was then used to generate diagnostic codes for a stratified sampling of 727 inpatients with discharge diagnoses in 12 diagnostic categories of psychotic disorders and affective disorders to examine the validity of the diagnostic codes.

Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient reliability of schizophrenia and three broad categories of diagnoses indicated good interrater reliability. The positive predictive value and sensitivity of common diagnoses in the narrow category (eg, schizophrenia) or the broad category (eg, psychotic disorders, bipolar disorders, and major depressive disorders) were high-performing (≥ 0.70), whereas those of the diagnoses of low prevalence were modest. The validity indices of claims-based diagnoses using the ICD-10-CM tended to be better than those using the ICD-9-CM.

Conclusion: This first-ever study validating psychiatric diagnoses in Taiwan's NHIRD using a structured chart review suggests that the diagnostic codes of narrow categories of schizophrenia or other broad categories are recommended for high-performing validity indices. Intensive training for the coding plus the specific details requested by the ICD-10 may increase the validity of the claims-based databases for psychotic and affective disorders.

评估台湾健保研究资料库中精神及情感性疾患理赔诊断编码的有效性及ICD-9至ICD-10编码转换的影响。
目的:尚未有研究验证台湾全民健保研究资料库(NHIRD)的精神疾病诊断。我们的目的是评估精神科医生之间的图表复习的互译信度,检查NHIRD中精神障碍和情感疾病诊断代码与基于复习的诊断的有效性,并检查编码系统从ICD-9-CM到ICD-10-CM的变化是否影响诊断代码的有效性。患者与方法:研究对象为2015年和2017年分别在国立台湾大学医院主医院和三家分院住院的18 ~ 65岁精神科住院患者。我们对48名有目的选择出院诊断为5个核心类别的住院患者进行了图表回顾,以评估相互信度。然后使用这种图表审查程序生成诊断代码,对727名出院诊断为精神障碍和情感障碍的12种诊断类别的住院患者进行分层抽样,以检验诊断代码的有效性。结果:精神分裂症与三大类诊断的类内相关系数信度均表现出良好的类间信度。窄类别(如精神分裂症)或宽泛类别(如精神障碍、双相情感障碍和重度抑郁症)常见诊断的阳性预测值和敏感性较高(≥0.70),而低患病率诊断的阳性预测值和敏感性一般。使用ICD-10-CM诊断的效度指标优于使用ICD-9-CM。​编码强化训练加上ICD-10要求的具体细节可能会增加基于权利要求的精神病和情感性障碍数据库的有效性。
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
Clinical Epidemiology
Clinical Epidemiology Medicine-Epidemiology
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.10%
发文量
169
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Epidemiology is an international, peer reviewed, open access journal. Clinical Epidemiology focuses on the application of epidemiological principles and questions relating to patients and clinical care in terms of prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Clinical Epidemiology welcomes papers covering these topics in form of original research and systematic reviews. Clinical Epidemiology has a special interest in international electronic medical patient records and other routine health care data, especially as applied to safety of medical interventions, clinical utility of diagnostic procedures, understanding short- and long-term clinical course of diseases, clinical epidemiological and biostatistical methods, and systematic reviews. When considering submission of a paper utilizing publicly-available data, authors should ensure that such studies add significantly to the body of knowledge and that they use appropriate validated methods for identifying health outcomes. The journal has launched special series describing existing data sources for clinical epidemiology, international health care systems and validation studies of algorithms based on databases and registries.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信