2014 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics 2014
DOI: 10.1109/ichi.2014.17
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Coding Support System for the ICD-9-CM Standard

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, some authors have explored lexical similarities by enriching the representation through dictionaries [1]- [3]. In a similar way, other proposals have used documents as queries, applying the expansion with ontologies [4]- [6]. Following this tendency, repositories of medical terminology have been explored to improve the representation of documents before applying machine learning [7].…”
Section: A Icd-10 Codingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, some authors have explored lexical similarities by enriching the representation through dictionaries [1]- [3]. In a similar way, other proposals have used documents as queries, applying the expansion with ontologies [4]- [6]. Following this tendency, repositories of medical terminology have been explored to improve the representation of documents before applying machine learning [7].…”
Section: A Icd-10 Codingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lastly, it may also be worth exploring more complex evaluation metrics aligned to the actual benefit for coders. This subject has recently been addressed in the literature, namely by Puentes et al (Puentes et al, 2013) through usability-related performance measures (from the coder perspective), by Perotte et al (Perotte et al, 2013) through hierarchy-based distance measures, and by (Chiaravalloti et al, 2014) based on code rankings. Accordingly, future work should consider these advanced performance measures, as well as issues concerning the acceptability and adoption of coding support tools by coding professionals in line with evidence on EHR system adoption (Weeger and Gewald, 2015…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The corpora of clinical records used in previous studies ranged from admission notes (Gundersen et al, 1996) to radiology or pathology reports (Aronson et al, 2007;Crammer et al, 2007;Farkas and Szarvas, 2008;Goldstein et al, 2007;Matykiewicz et al, 2006;Oleynik et al, 2017;Rizzo et al, 2015;Suominen et al, 2008;Zhang, 2008), discharge summaries (Delamarre et al, 1995;Dinwoodie and Howell, 1973;Franz et al, 2000;Friedman et al, 2004;Kevers and Medori, 2010;Kukafka et al, 2006;Larkey and Croft, 1995;Li et al, 2011;Lussier et al, 2000,0;Medori and Fairon, 2010), death certificates (Koopman et al, 2015,1) and entire medical records (Kavuluru et al, 2015;Lita et al, 2008;Morris et al, 2000;Pakhomov et al, 2006;Ruch et al, 2008), with variable structure and level of curation. Moreover, the majority of studies has been based on English texts, with the exception of particular studies in French (Kevers and Medori, 2010;Medori and Fairon, 2010;Pereira et al, 2006;Ruch et al, 2008), Spanish (Pérez et al, 2015), Italian (Chiaravalloti et al, 2014;Rizzo et al, 2015) or German (Franz et al, 2000), while information extraction from Portuguese medical texts is still emmerging (Ferreira, 2011;Rijo et al, 2014). The scope of clinical conditions comprised in each study also varied greatly, ranging from limited sets of respiratory…”
Section: Review Of Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All the above mentioned research studies are based on some type of deep learning, machine learning or statistical approach, where the information contained in the training data is distillate into mathematical models, which can be successfully employed for assigning ICD codes (Chiaravalloti et al, 2014). One of the main flaws in these approaches is that training data is annotated by human coders.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%