Kori Puspita Ningsih, Hartono Hartono, Nur Hafidha Hikmayani
{"title":"Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Clinical Coding Quality Assessment Instrument in Casemix Systems.","authors":"Kori Puspita Ningsih, Hartono Hartono, Nur Hafidha Hikmayani","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.183114.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In casemix-based payment systems, clinical coding quality plays a critical role in determining data validity, reimbursement accuracy, and overall performance. Financial inefficiencies, skewed morbidity data, and claim denials might result from incorrect coding. However, the majority of studies pay little attention to thorough and context-specific evaluation, instead concentrating mostly on coding accuracy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to use the Indonesian Case-Based Groups (INA-CBG) as the empirical backdrop for the development and psychometric validation of a multidimensional instrument for evaluating clinical coding quality in casemix systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An instrument development strategy based on ICD-10, ICD-9-CM, WHO coding guidelines, national casemix requirements, and results from coding audits was used to conduct a methodological investigation. The Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (I-CVI, S-CVI) were used to evaluate the content validity. Cohen's Kappa was used to assess inter-rater reliability, while Cronbach's alpha with 95% confidence intervals was used to quantify internal consistency. JASP was used for data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Clinical Coding Quality Assessment Instrument for Casemix (CCQAI-CM) comprises seven conceptual domains operationalized through 11 assessment items: diagnosis documentation, procedure documentation, documentation support, coding compliance, coding accuracy, diagnosis reselection, and procedure reselection. The instrument demonstrated high content validity (S-CVI = 0.972), varying item-level inter-rater agreement, and very high overall internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.982).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings provide initial evidence of the content validity and reliability of the CCQAI-CM as a multidimensional framework for assessing clinical coding quality in casemix systems. Further validation across healthcare settings and against relevant casemix outcomes is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"15 ","pages":"1138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13594603/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.183114.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: In casemix-based payment systems, clinical coding quality plays a critical role in determining data validity, reimbursement accuracy, and overall performance. Financial inefficiencies, skewed morbidity data, and claim denials might result from incorrect coding. However, the majority of studies pay little attention to thorough and context-specific evaluation, instead concentrating mostly on coding accuracy.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to use the Indonesian Case-Based Groups (INA-CBG) as the empirical backdrop for the development and psychometric validation of a multidimensional instrument for evaluating clinical coding quality in casemix systems.
Methods: An instrument development strategy based on ICD-10, ICD-9-CM, WHO coding guidelines, national casemix requirements, and results from coding audits was used to conduct a methodological investigation. The Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (I-CVI, S-CVI) were used to evaluate the content validity. Cohen's Kappa was used to assess inter-rater reliability, while Cronbach's alpha with 95% confidence intervals was used to quantify internal consistency. JASP was used for data analysis.
Results: The Clinical Coding Quality Assessment Instrument for Casemix (CCQAI-CM) comprises seven conceptual domains operationalized through 11 assessment items: diagnosis documentation, procedure documentation, documentation support, coding compliance, coding accuracy, diagnosis reselection, and procedure reselection. The instrument demonstrated high content validity (S-CVI = 0.972), varying item-level inter-rater agreement, and very high overall internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.982).
Conclusion: The findings provide initial evidence of the content validity and reliability of the CCQAI-CM as a multidimensional framework for assessing clinical coding quality in casemix systems. Further validation across healthcare settings and against relevant casemix outcomes is warranted.
F1000ResearchPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1646
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍:
F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.