PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9929207

Evaluating a computerized tool for coding patient information.

C Bouchet·F Empereur·F Kohler
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Computerized tools may be useful in speeding up and facilitating the laborious task of coding patient information. This paper describes a method of objectively evaluating their efficiency. DESIGN: 38 study subjects were randomly assigned to a manual coding group or an automated coding group, with stratification according to two variables (used to coding yes/no, physician yes/no). Subjects then coded the same standardized set of diagnoses in a limited time. The numbers of exact codes retrieved were compared using a global analysis of variance model. RESULTS: The two groups were not significantly different with regard to the number of physicians (p = 0.74) and the number of usual coders (p = 0.52) they included. Significantly more exact codes were achieved in the group using automated coding than among the manual group (p = 0.04). Physicians were significantly more efficient at coding than non-physicians (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This study describes an objective means of evaluating the performance of an automated coding tool. It shows that better results were achieved with the computerised compared to the manual method, even when the superior abilities of physicians were taken into account.

Explore related subjects

DiseaseElectronic Data ProcessingEvaluation Studies as TopicHumansPatientsPhysiciansSoftwareClinical TrialComparative StudyJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled Trial

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C Bouchet, F Empereur, F Kohler. 1998. Evaluating a computerized tool for coding patient information.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9929207/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

The origin of individual differences in the course and severity of diseases.

Any disease manifests itself individually either by a bright or restricted spectrum of clinical signs and resultant clinical courses that range from asymptomatic to deadly, from acute to chronic, etc. Until recently, the origin of this kind of biodiversity was poorly investigated and understood, but advances in immunology--especially in identifying constitutional (genetic) mechanisms of immunity--have contributed to our understanding of the origin of individual diversity in diseases. Any disease destroys only focal areas in the affected organisms, and the amounts, sizes, and distribution of such focal lesions vary from patient to patient. In a population predilected to a relevant pathogenic agent, individuals can be conveniently divided into three categories: totally resistant organisms that contain no susceptible structures and are not affected; mildly susceptible organisms in which a few foci appear and in which the disease runs a benign course; organisms in which the number of constitutionally susceptible structures is high and the disease develops in a severe form. The diversity is formed by the mating of genetically different parents that determines the differences in susceptibility of genetically various parts of the descendant organism.

Disease↗
PubMed2006

The conceptualisation of health and disease in veterinary medicine.

BACKGROUND: The concept of health, as well as the concept of disease, is central in veterinary medicine. However, the definitions "health" and "disease" are not generally acknowledged by veterinarians. The aim of this study was to examine how the concepts "health" and "disease" are defined in veterinary textbooks. METHODS: Veterinary textbooks in several disciplines were investigated, but only textbooks with explicit definitions of the concepts were selected for examination. RESULTS: Eighty out of the 500 relevant books within veterinary medicine were written for non-veterinarians. Eight percent of the books had an explicit definition of health and/or disease. More frequently, textbooks written for non veterinarians did have definitions of health or disease, compared to textbooks written for professionals. A division of health definitions in five different categories was suggested, namely: 1. Health as normality, 2. Health as biological function, 3. Health as homeostasis, 4. Health as physical and psychological well-being and 5. Health as productivity including reproduction. CONCLUSION: Few veterinary textbooks had any health or disease definition at all. Furthermore, explicit definitions of health stated by the authors seemed to have little impact on how health and disease are handled within the profession. Veterinary medicine would probably gain from theoretical discussions about health and disease.

Disease↗