Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “International Classification of Diseases”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1987

Culture-bound syndromes and international disease classifications.

An important endeavor in the world psychiatric community is the development of an international classification of psychiatric disorders that will be more culture-free than either the current DSM-III or ICD-9. This classification should be clinically useful and relevant to psychiatric experience in all countries of the world. A major problem in this endeavor is the existence of the so-called culture-bound syndromes syndromes (CBS's) which reflect cultural influences on disease patterns and render them difficult to place in disease classifications which have their origins in Western cultures. Literally dozens of disorders have been labelled CBS's around the world, and considerable looseness has developed in the use of the CBS rubric. Recently it has been proposed that all illnesses (both physical and psychiatric) are in fact culture bound. In reaction to this drift towards meaninglessness, a new definition for CBS's is proposed - a collection of signs and symptoms (excluding notions of cause) which is restricted to a limited number of cultures primarily by reason of certain of their psychosocial features. In this definition, notions of etiology and illness labels are excluded because these are highly variable and change over time. On the other hand, collections of signs and symptoms (i.e., syndromes), insofar as they are reasonably complete descriptions of nature, remain constant over time and are verifiable by all investigators. Using two CBS's from the Pacific basin area - taijin-kyofu-sho and latah - as examples, the following conclusions are drawn: CBS status should not be assigned on the basis of differential distribution of illnesses because of accidents of geography or on the basis of local labels or notions of cause; epidemiological features of diseases such as global prevalence or age/sex differentials of those affected should not be used as basis of CBS status; the meaning of illness, both for individuals and for cultures, is an important area of study in its own right but such meanings should not be confused with syndrome descriptions or used as criteria for an international disease classification; a truly international classification of diseases is close to realization through relatively minor alterations in the Axis I designations and descriptions of DSM-III. Few entirely new categories would be required.

Adult↗
PubMed1988

Classification of mental disorder in primary care.

This monograph describes a study designed to test how far the two major international systems of disease classification, International Classification of Diseases (ICD) and International Classification of Health Problems in Primary Care (ICHPPC), can be consistently applied by General Practitioners (GPs) to mental disorder presenting in primary care, and to identify sources of observer variation occurring at different stages of clinical judgement. A group of 27 senior GPs was exposed to a series of real life general practice consultations, either in the form of videotape or written case-vignette material, chosen to reflect a wide range of minor psychiatric problems, differing not only in respect of phenomenology but also of their associations with social stresses and supports, physical illness and personality features. The findings clearly indicate that neither ICD nor ICHPPC can be applied consistently by GPs. However, while the overall diagnostic concordance using ICD and ICHPPC proved to be disappointingly low, agreement on individual observations relating to psychological, physical, personality and social features was moderately good. It was also noted that participants, when given the opportunity, tended to incorporate several domains into their diagnostic conclusions, aiming for a multidimensional formulation, to which neither ICD nor ICHPPC lend themselves. It is, therefore, not surprising that if the principal diagnostic schemata are neither adequate in themselves nor readily applicable to primary care, then GPs are more likely to resort to symptomatic treatment and evade diagnosis when confronted with minor psychiatric morbidity. The consequence of this approach for National Morbidity Surveys and drug trials are discussed. The historical development of multiaxial schemata of classification is briefly traced, the problems associated with DSM-III are discussed, and a comprehensive model of classification is proposed which incorporates the notions of severity and duration as well as of category on the four dimensions of psychological illness, social stresses and supports, personality and physical illness.

Adjustment Disorders↗
PubMed1991

[Analysis of information on health: 1893-1993, one hundred years since the International Classification of Diseases].

The analysis of mortality by cause, as well as of morbidity, calls for an instrument that groups the diseases according to common characteristics, that is to say, a classification of diseases. The WHO International Classification of Diseases, in its Ninth Revision, is currently in use. This classification first appeared in 1893; its Tenth Revision is being proposed for 1993. This present paper describes the origins of this international classification, making special references to John Graunt, William Farr and Jacques Bertillon as well as describing the evolution that has occurred through its successive revisions. Initially it was a classification that included only causes of death. After the Sixth Revision included all the diseases and causes of medical consultations, thus allowing its use in morbidity. For the tenth and later revisions, a "family" of classifications is proposed, for a great variety of uses in health services, administration and epidemiology. Some critical observations on the current international classification of diseases are also presented.

Adult↗
PubMed1989

The development of a disease classification system, based on the International Classification of Diseases, for use by neurologists.

Effective planning and evaluation of medical services is only possible if appropriate and reliable information is available. Diagnoses of patients seen are essential data. The epidemiological value of standard, reliable diagnostic data could also be considerable. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is the only system currently available which provides a common basis of classification for general statistical use. A booklet, using ICD codes, for classifying in-patients and out-patients seen by neurologists has been developed. It is simple and easy to use, affords the necessary economy of time, and should result in uniformity of coding. Reliability studies confirm that inaccuracies occur when patients' diagnoses are coded retrospectively from their medical files, even when observers are medically trained. It is recommended that doctors should accept personal responsibility for coding patients' diagnoses at the time of consultation or discharge from hospital.

Diagnosis, Differential↗
PubMed1994

[The international classification of WHO diseases (ICD-10) and its application in neurology (ICD-10 NA)].

The 10th Revision of the International Disease Classification (ICD-10) was published in English in September 1992 and in French in January 1993. Chapter VI (main code G) deals with diseases of the nervous system. There are 11 chapters covering the main categories of aetiologies. The subdivisions designated by the three-character codes are used to define the main diagnostic categories as divided according to aetiology, localization or symptoms. The three-character codes so formed are the legal basis for codifying causes of death in all the member states of the WHO. Supplementary 4-digit codes can be used for more precise definitions of morbidity; ICD-10 NA, the Application to Neurology, is a detailed classification of diseases of neurological origin or expression, based on the original ICD-10. Thus it also contains a table of inclusion and exclusion terms and a detailed alphabetical index. The inclusion terms are names of diseases, affections or syndromes associated with each ICD code. The exclusion terms are listed so that the disease in question is classified elsewhere. Thus it is easy to find the correct category even for similar or related diseases which may be classified in different chapters of the ICD-10 NA. The coding system of the ICD-10 NA is exactly the same as for the ICD-10 since cross-referencing requires that specialization classifications such as the ICD-10 NA derived from the ICD must have the same 3 and 4 digit codes as those in the original ICD-10. Within these limits, the 5th, 6th and 7th digits of the subdivision codes, and the generalization of multiple coding used to describe both aetiologies and manifestations, have greatly increased the discriminating power and precision of neurological diseases classification based on the parent ICD.

Disease↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The International Classification of Diseases: the structure and content of the Tenth Revision.

The Tenth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases is due to be published this year, and introduced from 1993. The aim of the classification is to facilitate comparisons between countries at the same point in time and within, and between, countries over time. The provision of comparable statistics is essential for facilitating policy decisions relating to health promotion and disease prevention, and for the collection of epidemiological data for research purposes. This article describes the major changes and important features in this revision, and compares them to the Ninth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases.

Disease↗
PubMed1996

[Evaluation of the use of the International Classification of Diseases for the codification of AIDS].

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) provides codes for all conditions and permits international comparisons of morbidity and mortality. Because it has to be used all over the world its codes are not always perfectly appropriate. There are revisions from time to time to bring up-to-date the classification. This has happened with AIDS, included in the chapter of infectious diseases in the last revision, ICD-10. The use of ICD-10 AIDS codes is here appraised. All surveillance report forms of one specialized hospital in infectious diseases, notified in 1994, have been codified, but it was found that many diagnoses could not be codified in accordance with a single ICD-10 AIDS code.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗
PubMed1979

The application of the International Classification of Diseases to dentistry and stomatology.

The Application of the International Classification of Diseases to Dentistry and Stomatology (ICD-DA) takes from the parent volume (the International Classification of Diseases) all those items of specific interest in regard to oral pathology whether they be common or rare conditions, or whether the pathology originates in the oral cavity or is a manifestation of a systemic disease. The initial advantage is convenience in finding the numerical classification of disease without searching through the large parent volume. However, an even greater advantage is the fact that these conditions are not sufficiently subclassified in the parent manual whereas in the ICD-DA they are classified down to the five-digit level to make differential diagnosis meaningful within the practice of dentistry.

Humans↗
PubMed2003

Disease classification: measuring the effect of the Tenth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases on cause-of-death data in the United States.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the statistical impact of the Tenth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) on cause-of-death data for the United States. ICD-10 was implemented in the U.S. effective with deaths occurring in 1999. The paper is based on cause-of-death information from a large sample of 1996 death certificates filed in the 50 States and the District of Columbia. Cause-of-death information in the sample includes underlying cause of death classified by both ICD-9 and ICD-10. Preliminary comparability ratios by cause of death presented in this paper indicate the extent of discontinuities in cause-of-death trends from 1998 to 1999 resulting from implementing ICD-10. For some leading causes (for example, septicaemia, influenza and pneumonia, Alzheimer's disease, and nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis) the discontinuity in trend is substantial. Results of this study, although preliminary, are essential to analysing trends in mortality statistics between ICD-9 and ICD-10. In particular, the results provide a means for interpreting changes between 1998, which is the last year in which ICD-9 was used, and 1999, the year in which ICD-10 was implemented for mortality in the United States. Published in 2003 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cause of Death↗
PubMed1997

Inaccuracy of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9-CM) in identifying the diagnosis of ischemic cerebrovascular disease.

In administrative databases the International Classification of Diseases, Version 9, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) is often used to identify patients with specific diagnoses. However, certain conditions may not be accurately reflected by the ICD-9 codes. We assessed the accuracy of ICD-9 coding for cerebrovascular disease by comparing ICD-9 codes in an administrative database with clinical findings ascertained from medical record abstractions. We selected patients with ICD-9 diagnostic codes of 433 through 436 (in either the primary or secondary positions) from an administrative database of patients hospitalized in five academic medical centers in 1992. Medical records of the selected patients were reviewed by trained medical abstractors, and the patients' clinical conditions during the admission (stroke, TIA, asymptomatic) were recorded, as well as any history of cerebrovascular symptoms. Results of the medical record review were compared with the ICD-9 codes from the administrative database. More than 85% of those patients with the ICD-9 code 433 were asymptomatic for the index admission. More than one-third of these asymptomatic patients did not undergo either cerebral angiography or carotid endarterectomy. For ICD-9 code 434, 85% of patients were classified as having a stroke and for ICD-9 code 435, 77% had TIAs. For code 436, 77% of patients were classified as having strokes. Limiting the identifying ICD-9 code to the primary position increased the likelihood of agreement with the medical record review. The ICD-9 coding scheme may be inaccurate in the classification of patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease. Its limitations must be recognized in the analyses of administrative databases selected by using ICD-9 codes 433 through 436.

Arterial Occlusive Diseases↗
PubMed1999

Questions on validity of International Classification of Diseases-coded diagnoses.

International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes are used for indexing medical diagnoses for various purposes and in various contexts. According to the literature and our personal experience, the validity of the coded information is unsatisfactory in general, however the 'correctness' is purpose and environment dependent. For detecting potential error sources, this paper gives a general framework of the coding process. The key elements of this framework are: (1) the formulation of the established diagnoses in medical language; (2) the induction from diagnoses to diseases; (3) indexing the diseases to ICD categories; (4) labelling of the coded entries (e.g. principal disease, complications, etc.). Each step is a potential source of errors. The most typical types of error are: (1) overlooking of diagnoses; (2) incorrect or skipped induction; (3) indexing errors; (4) violation of ICD rules and external regulations. The main reasons of the errors are the physician's errors in the primary documentation, the insufficient knowledge of the encoders (different steps of the coding process require different kind of knowledge), the internal inconsistency of the ICD, and some psychological factors. Computer systems can facilitate the coding process, but attention has to be paid to the entire coding process, not only to the indexing phase.

Abstracting and Indexing↗