LAUSR

Abstract Objective To study the effect on patient cohorts of mapping condition (diagnosis) codes from source billing vocabularies to a clinical vocabulary. Materials and Methods Nine International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD9-CM) concept sets were extracted from eMERGE network phenotypes, translated to Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms concept sets, and applied to patient data that were mapped from source ICD9-CM and ICD10-CM codes to Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms codes using Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) vocabulary mappings. The original ICD9-CM concept set and a concept set extended to ICD10-CM were used to create patient cohorts that served as gold standards. Results Four phenotype concept sets were able to be translated to Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms without ambiguities and were able to perform perfectly with respect to the gold standards. The other 5 lost performance when 2 or more ICD9-CM or ICD10-CM codes mapped to the same Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms code. The patient cohorts had a total error (false positive and false negative) of up to 0.15% compared to querying ICD9-CM source data and up to 0.26% compared to querying ICD9-CM and ICD10-CM data. Knowledge engineering was required to produce that performance; simple automated methods to generate concept sets had errors up to 10% (one outlier at 250%). Discussion The translation of data from source vocabularies to Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) resulted in very small error rates that were an order of magnitude smaller than other error sources. Conclusion It appears possible to map diagnoses from disparate vocabularies to a single clinical vocabulary and carry out research using a single set of definitions, thus improving efficiency and transportability of research.