Development and Psychometric Validation of a Multidimensional Clinical Coding Quality Assessment Instrument in Casemix Systems.

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
F1000Research Pub Date : 2026-09-30 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.12688/f1000research.183114.3
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.

Casemix系统多维临床编码质量评估工具的开发与心理计量学验证。
在基于病例混合的支付系统中,临床编码质量在决定数据有效性、报销准确性和整体绩效方面起着至关重要的作用。不正确的编码可能导致财务效率低下、发病率数据扭曲和索赔拒绝。然而,大多数研究很少关注全面和特定于上下文的评估,而是主要关注编码的准确性。目的:本研究的目的是使用印度尼西亚病例基础组(INA-CBG)作为经验背景,开发和心理测量验证一种多维工具,用于评估病例混合系统的临床编码质量。方法:采用基于ICD-10、ICD-9-CM、世卫组织编码指南、国家病例混合要求和编码审核结果的仪器开发策略进行方法学调查。采用内容效度比(CVR)和内容效度指数(I-CVI, S-CVI)评价内容效度。采用Cohen’s Kappa评估评级者间信度,采用95%置信区间的Cronbach’s alpha量化内部一致性。采用JASP进行数据分析。结果:Casemix临床编码质量评估工具(ccqaii - cm)包括七个概念域,通过11个评估项目进行操作:诊断文件、程序文件、文件支持、编码符合性、编码准确性、诊断重选和程序重选。该量表具有较高的内容效度(S-CVI = 0.972)、不同项目水平的量表间一致性和非常高的整体内部一致性(Cronbach’s α = 0.982)。结论:研究结果为ccqaic - cm作为评估病例混合系统临床编码质量的多维框架的内容有效性和可靠性提供了初步证据。根据相关的病例组合结果,有必要在医疗保健设置中进一步验证。
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
F1000Research
F1000Research Pharmacology, 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.
×
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
小红书