Automated identification of diagnostic labelling errors in medicine

Hautz, Wolf E.; Kündig, Moritz M.; Tschanz, Roger; Birrenbach, Tanja; Schuster, Alexander; Bürkle, Thomas; Hautz, Stefanie C.; Sauter, Thomas C.; Krummrey, Gert (2021). Automated identification of diagnostic labelling errors in medicine. Diagnosis, 9(2), pp. 241-249. De Gruyter 10.1515/dx-2021-0039

Preview

Text 10.1515_dx-2021-0039.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (696kB) | Preview

Objectives: Identification of diagnostic error is complex and mostly relies on expert ratings, a severely limited procedure. We developed a system that allows to automatically identify diagnostic labelling error from diagnoses coded according to the international classification of diseases (ICD), often available as routine health care data.

Methods: The system developed (index test) was validated against rater based classifications taken from three previous studies of diagnostic labeling error (reference standard). The system compares pairs of diagnoses through calculation of their distance within the ICD taxonomy. Calculation is based on four different algorithms. To assess the concordance between index test and reference standard, we calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) and corresponding confidence intervals. Analysis were conducted overall and separately per algorithm and type of available dataset.

Results: Diagnoses of 1,127 cases were analyzed. Raters previously classified 24.58% of cases as diagnostic labelling errors (ranging from 12.3 to 87.2% in the three datasets). AUROC ranged between 0.821 and 0.837 overall, depending on the algorithm used to calculate the index test (95% CIs ranging from 0.8 to 0.86). Analyzed per type of dataset separately, the highest AUROC was 0.924 (95% CI 0.887-0.962).

Conclusions: The trigger system to automatically identify diagnostic labeling error from routine health care data performs excellent, and is unaffected by the reference standards' limitations. It is however only applicable to cases with pairs of diagnoses, of which one must be more accurate or otherwise superior than the other, reflecting a prevalent definition of a diagnostic labeling error.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

69 since deposited on 07 Dec 2021
17 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item