Search

An examination of the conceptual definition of learning disabilities may be fundamental for interpreting the results of diagnostic procedures. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision published by the World Health Organization (WHO) delineate a common diagnostic cluster system that enables multidisciplinary communication between different disciplines by providing a common professional language, vocabulary, and interoperability of systems. Several problems, including learning, are not only relevant to the field of education, but may also be relevant from a medical science perspective. Given the new discourse in the field of special needs education, such as the holistic approach, this is a fundamental requirement. This is not only relevant for a more effective diagnosis of learning disabilities but also for inclusion without an interdisciplinary discourse in which conceptual boundaries are not meaningful for different disciplines. The implementation of research findings in international discourse can also be successful if the findings are interpretable not only across disciplines, but also across national borders. Using secondary source analysis and desk research, we analysed the conceptual definitions of ICD and APA from the perspective of learning disabilities. Our results highlight fundamental correlations that may justify a reinterpretation of the way diagnostic results are used in comparison with previous versions of diagnostic systems. This may foreshadow the need to adapt the diagnostic system and improve the process in case it has not yet adapted the latest scientific findings and diagnostic clusters. In our view, the introduction of new diagnostic principles and clustering methodologies could be an argument for revising the structure and functioning of previous systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ICD-11 provides a promising new way to capture healthcare-related harm or injury. In this paper, we elaborate on the framework for describing healthcare-related events where there is a presumed causal link between an event and underlying healthcare-related factors. The three-part model for describing healthcare-related harm or injury in ICD-11 consists of (1) a healthcare-related activity that is the cause of injury or other harm (selected from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); (2) a mode or mechanism of injury or harm, related to the underlying cause (also from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); and (3) the harmful consequences of the event to the patient, selected from any of Chapters 1 through 22 of ICD-11 (most importantly, the injury or harm experienced by the patient). Concepts from these three elements are linked/clustered through postcoordination to reflect the three-part model in a single coded expression. ICD-11 contains many novel features, and the three-part model described here for healthcare-related adverse events is a notable example.

Abstract A new coding feature introduced with ICD-11, the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), is postcoordination, which supports combining (linking) two or more codes into a cluster that describes a clinical concept. Postcoordination allows for coded data to be reported to a greater level of specificity than was possible in previous version of ICD. The linked codes are kept together in a cluster when submitted for reporting. This article presents background detail on the postcoordination feature in ICD and the postcoordination tool. Also presented are several examples that demonstrate the flexibility that ICD-11 provides for enriching coded health information.

Abstract ICD-11 provides a promising new way to capture healthcare-related harm or injury. In this paper, we elaborate on the framework for describing healthcare-related events where there is a presumed causal link between an event and underlying healthcare-related factors. The three-part model for describing healthcare-related harm or injury in ICD-11 consists of (1) a healthcare-related activity that is the cause of injury or other harm (selected from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); (2) a mode or mechanism of injury or harm, related to the underlying cause (also from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); and (3) the harmful consequences of the event to the patient, selected from any of Chapters 1 through 22 of ICD-11 (most importantly, the injury or harm experienced by the patient). Concepts from these three elements are linked/clustered through postcoordination to reflect the three-part model in a single coded expression. ICD-11 contains many novel features, and the three-part model described here for healthcare-related adverse events is a notable example.

Abstract Background The new International Classification of Diseases—11th revision (ICD-11) succeeds ICD-10. In the three decades since ICD-10 was released, demands for detailed information on the clinical history of a morbid patient have increased. Methods ICD-11 has now implemented an addendum chapter X called “Extension Codes”. This chapter contains numerous codes containing information on concepts including disease stage, severity, histopathology, medicaments, and anatomical details. When linked to a stem code representing a clinical state, the extension codes add significant detail and allow for multidimensional coding. Results This paper discusses the purposes and uses of extension codes and presents three examples of how extension codes can be used in coding clinical detail. Conclusion ICD-11 with its extension codes implemented has the potential to improve precision and evidence based health care worldwide.

Abstract Background The World Health Organization estimates that 75% of patients with mental and substance use disorders in low- and middle-income countries do not have access to the care needed. In the Arab World, approximately 100–140 million people suffer from at least one psychiatric disorder. One main criticism of classification systems has been their lack of cultural sensitivity. The International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition aims to improve clinical utility of psychiatric classification across cultures. Mood, anxiety and stress-related disorders are the most common psychiatric manifestations and the most impacted by cultural factors. Main body Relying on rigorous field testing, including in three Arab countries, clinically meaningful changes have been introduced in the International Classification of Diseases 11. These include new disorders such as complex post-traumatic stress disorder and prolonged grief disorder. In classifying mood episodes, the pattern of symptoms over time is emphasized. Disorders associated with anxiety provide the basis for a new grouping separate from obsessive-compulsive-related disorders. Lastly, culture and its impact are incorporated into each diagnostic grouping. Conclusions This latest version of the International Classification of Diseases prioritizes addressing gaps in the validity and reliability of psychiatric classification. The methodology adopted in this latest revision is encouraging and opens the way to truly global collaboration on refining psychiatric diagnoses and practice.

Background: The new International Classification of Diseases-11th revision (ICD-11) succeeds ICD-10. In the three decades since ICD-10 was released, demands for detailed information on the clinical history of a morbid patient have increased.Methods: ICD-11 has now implemented an addendum chapter X called "Extension Codes". This chapter contains numerous codes containing information on concepts including disease stage, severity, histopathology, medicaments, and anatomical details. When linked to a stem code representing a clinical state, the extension codes add significant detail and allow for multidimensional coding.Results: This paper discusses the purposes and uses of extension codes and presents three examples of how extension codes can be used in coding clinical detail.Conclusion: ICD-11 with its extension codes implemented has the potential to improve precision and evidence based health care worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A new coding feature introduced with ICD-11, the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), is postcoordination, which supports combining (linking) two or more codes into a cluster that describes a clinical concept. Postcoordination allows for coded data to be reported to a greater level of specificity than was possible in previous version of ICD. The linked codes are kept together in a cluster when submitted for reporting. This article presents background detail on the postcoordination feature in ICD and the postcoordination tool. Also presented are several examples that demonstrate the flexibility that ICD-11 provides for enriching coded health information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ICD-11 provides a promising new way to capture healthcare-related harm or injury. In this paper, we elaborate on the framework for describing healthcare-related events where there is a presumed causal link between an event and underlying healthcare-related factors. The three-part model for describing healthcare-related harm or injury in ICD-11 consists of (1) a healthcare-related activity that is the cause of injury or other harm (selected from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); (2) a mode or mechanism of injury or harm, related to the underlying cause (also from Chapter 23 of ICD-11); and (3) the harmful consequences of the event to the patient, selected from any of Chapters 1 through 22 of ICD-11 (most importantly, the injury or harm experienced by the patient). Concepts from these three elements are linked/clustered through postcoordination to reflect the three-part model in a single coded expression. ICD-11 contains many novel features, and the three-part model described here for healthcare-related adverse events is a notable example., (© 2022. The Author(s).)