Brief Communication: Reliability of causal indicators for nonfatal injuries

The applicability of the ICD E code as a causal indicator of nonfatal injuries has been criticized. New codes have been developed to replace the ICD codes. We compared the coding reliability of the ICD E and place vs. the Nordic mechanism (M) and place codes. The mean accuracy (76 vs. 70%) (p < 0...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Scandinavian journal of public health 1990-12, Vol.18 (4), p.257-261
Main Authors: Honkanen, Risto J., Mönkkönen, Raija
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The applicability of the ICD E code as a causal indicator of nonfatal injuries has been criticized. New codes have been developed to replace the ICD codes. We compared the coding reliability of the ICD E and place vs. the Nordic mechanism (M) and place codes. The mean accuracy (76 vs. 70%) (p < 0.002) and the intercoder reliability (84 vs. 69%) (p < 0.001) were better for the E than M code. The accuracy of the place codes was the same (83%). A short training improved (p < 0.001) the accuracy of all four codes. The replacement of the E code with the M code would not improve the reliability of data on causes of injuries.
ISSN:1403-4948
0300-8037
1651-1905
DOI:10.1177/140349489001800404