It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Clinical coding is the task of transforming medical information in a patient’s health records into structured codes so that they can be used for statistical analysis. This is a cognitive and time-consuming task that follows a standard process in order to achieve a high level of consistency. Clinical coding could potentially be supported by an automated system to improve the efficiency and accuracy of the process. We introduce the idea of automated clinical coding and summarise its challenges from the perspective of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Natural Language Processing (NLP), based on the literature, our project experience over the past two and half years (late 2019–early 2022), and discussions with clinical coding experts in Scotland and the UK. Our research reveals the gaps between the current deep learning-based approach applied to clinical coding and the need for explainability and consistency in real-world practice. Knowledge-based methods that represent and reason the standard, explainable process of a task may need to be incorporated into deep learning-based methods for clinical coding. Automated clinical coding is a promising task for AI, despite the technical and organisational challenges. Coders are needed to be involved in the development process. There is much to achieve to develop and deploy an AI-based automated system to support coding in the next five years and beyond.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details






1 University of Edinburgh, Centre for Medical Informatics, Usher Institute, Edinburgh, UK (GRID:grid.4305.2) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7988); University of Oxford, Department of Computer Science, Oxford, UK (GRID:grid.4991.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8948)
2 University of Edinburgh, School of Informatics, Edinburgh, UK (GRID:grid.4305.2) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7988)
3 University of Edinburgh, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, Edinburgh, UK (GRID:grid.4305.2) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7988)
4 University of Edinburgh, School of Informatics, Edinburgh, UK (GRID:grid.4305.2) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7988); Edinburgh Futures Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK (GRID:grid.4305.2) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7988)
5 Epic Systems Corporation, Verona, USA (GRID:grid.466656.1) (ISNI:0000 0004 0523 9811); University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Clinical Research Informatics Unit, London, UK (GRID:grid.52996.31) (ISNI:0000 0000 8937 2257)
6 Aalto University, Department of Computer Science, Espoo, Finland (GRID:grid.5373.2) (ISNI:0000000108389418)
7 University of Oxford, Department of Computer Science, Oxford, UK (GRID:grid.4991.5) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8948)
8 University College London, Institute of Health Informatics, London, UK (GRID:grid.83440.3b) (ISNI:0000000121901201)