Re: [openhealth] Standards -- more questions

Sat, 13 May 2006 09:20:24 -0700

I work on health information systems in developing countries and we have continuing problems because many countries try to collect diagnosis information using some version of ICD codes.  The resulting data is useless because people are not trained to collect this data with the high degree of granularity that ICD requires.  Where possible, we devise a list of about 50 "syndromic" diagnoses which gives much better information.


Mark H. Spohr, MD

----- Original Message ----
From: Heitzso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: openhealth@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 10:33:26 AM
Subject: Re: [openhealth] Standards -- more questions

   I do *strongly* recommend researching human engineering studies
re determine whether a fine granularity such as is provided by ICD-10,
which may be very accurate from a technical point of view, does, in
practice, provide more accuracy than a lower granularity encoding.
If such a study does not exist then some psychiatrists should be
consulted re the ability of humans when, under stress, to accurately
assign diseases to one of 10,000 buckets.

I do know that the CDC has to scrub all incoming data to get rid of
the obvious data encoding errors such as women with testicular diseases
and men with vaginal diseases.   That scrubbing catches only the
obvious encoding problems.

Second, to at least understand the data inference problem imposed by a fine
granularity standard encoding when mapping from a lower granularity
to the finer granularity.


        
         YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

     Visit your group "openhealth" on the web.
     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 
    
     



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



SPONSORED LINKS
Software distribution Salon software Medical software
Software association Software jewelry Software deployment

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to