Comparison of accuracy captured by different controlled languages in oral pathology diagnoses.


Autoria(s): Chen, Jung-Wei; Flaitz, Catherine; Johnson, Todd
Data(s)

01/01/2005

Resumo

This project was comparing the accuracy of capturing the oral pathology diagnoses among different coding systems. 55 diagnoses were selected for comparison among 5 coding systems. The results of accuracy in capturing oral diagnoses are: AFIP (96.4%), followed by Read 99 (85.5%), SNOMED 98 (74.5%), ICD-9 (43.6%), and CDT-3 (14.5%). It shows that the currently used coding systems, ICD-9 and CDT-3, were inadequate, whereas the AFIP coding system captured the majority of oral diagnoses. In conclusion, the most commonly used medical and dental coding systems lack terms for the diagnosis of oral and dental conditions.

Identificador

http://digitalcommons.library.tmc.edu/uthdb_docs/4

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=16779205

Publicador

DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center

Fonte

Journal Articles

Palavras-Chave #Diagnosis #Oral #Humans #Pathology #Oral #Vocabulary #Controlled #Diagnosis, Oral #Pathology, Oral #Vocabulary, Controlled #Dentistry
Tipo

text