The use of the W.H.O. International Classification of Diseases (Mental Retardation) in a Hospital for Mentally Handicapped

1974 ◽  
Vol 125 (587) ◽  
pp. 333-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Spencer

On 17 November 1969, Dr. A. A. Baker, then Senior Principal Medical Officer, Department of Health and Social Security, sent a letter to consultants at mental subnormality hospitals in which he requested them to introduce the World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases, Eighth Edition, 1965, in the completion of Mental Health Inquiry Index Cards. The booklet A Glossary of Mental Disorders, No. 22 in the General Register Office Studies on Medical and Population Subjects was enclosed with the letter for information and to facilitate the use of the Classification.

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1872-1938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodney C. G. Franklin ◽  
Marie J. Béland ◽  
Steven D. Colan ◽  
Henry L. Walters ◽  
Vera D. Aiello ◽  
...  

AbstractAn internationally approved and globally used classification scheme for the diagnosis of CHD has long been sought. The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code (IPCCC), which was produced and has been maintained by the International Society for Nomenclature of Paediatric and Congenital Heart Disease (the International Nomenclature Society), is used widely, but has spawned many “short list” versions that differ in content depending on the user. Thus, efforts to have a uniform identification of patients with CHD using a single up-to-date and coordinated nomenclature system continue to be thwarted, even if a common nomenclature has been used as a basis for composing various “short lists”. In an attempt to solve this problem, the International Nomenclature Society has linked its efforts with those of the World Health Organization to obtain a globally accepted nomenclature tree for CHD within the 11th iteration of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). The International Nomenclature Society has submitted a hierarchical nomenclature tree for CHD to the World Health Organization that is expected to serve increasingly as the “short list” for all communities interested in coding for congenital cardiology. This article reviews the history of the International Classification of Diseases and of the IPCCC, and outlines the process used in developing the ICD-11 congenital cardiac disease diagnostic list and the definitions for each term on the list. An overview of the content of the congenital heart anomaly section of the Foundation Component of ICD-11, published herein in its entirety, is also included. Future plans for the International Nomenclature Society include linking again with the World Health Organization to tackle procedural nomenclature as it relates to cardiac malformations. By doing so, the Society will continue its role in standardising nomenclature for CHD across the globe, thereby promoting research and better outcomes for fetuses, children, and adults with congenital heart anomalies.


2019 ◽  
pp. 32-32
Author(s):  
Alessandra Diehl ◽  
Jair de Jesus Mari ◽  
Elias Abdalla Filho

The World Health Organization (WHO) has made substantial changes to the classification of paraphilic disorders (F65) for the Eleventh Revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11). Its expected that by January 2022 the ICD-11 may already be used by clinicians and stakeholders in many countries around the world.


1991 ◽  
Vol 159 (S14) ◽  
pp. 46-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Sims

The psychiatric section, entitled ‘Mental, Behavioural and Developmental Disorders‘ of the International Classification of Diseases, is currently in the process of revision, and ‘ICD—10‘ will shortly become available. This revision will be based partly on its immediate predecessor, the 9th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD—9; World Health Organization, 1978), and also upon the American Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM—III—R; American Psychiatric Association, 1987). ICD—10 describes and lists symptoms required for making each specific diagnosis and it also refers to inclusions and exclusions. The symptoms themselves, however, are not defined nor described, and an ill-informed method of evaluating symptoms or a lack of thoroughness in their ascertainment will result in mistaken diagnoses. The descriptive psychopathologist clearly has a part to play in encouraging accurate usage.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 738-746
Author(s):  
Kin Wah Fung ◽  
, Julia Xu ◽  
Olivier Bodenreider

Abstract Objective To study the newly adopted International Classification of Diseases 11th revision (ICD-11) and compare it to the International Classification of Diseases 10th revision (ICD-10) and International Classification of Diseases 10th revision-Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM). Materials and Methods : Data files and maps were downloaded from the World Health Organization (WHO) website and through the application programming interfaces. A round trip method based on the WHO maps was used to identify equivalent codes between ICD-10 and ICD-11, which were validated by limited manual review. ICD-11 terms were mapped to ICD-10-CM through normalized lexical mapping. ICD-10-CM codes in 6 disease areas were also manually recoded in ICD-11. Results Excluding the chapters for traditional medicine, functioning assessment, and extension codes for postcoordination, ICD-11 has 14 622 leaf codes (codes that can be used in coding) compared to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM, which has 10 607 and 71 932 leaf codes, respectively. We identified 4037 pairs of ICD-10 and ICD-11 codes that were equivalent (estimated accuracy of 96%) by our round trip method. Lexical matching between ICD-11 and ICD-10-CM identified 4059 pairs of possibly equivalent codes. Manual recoding showed that 60% of a sample of 388 ICD-10-CM codes could be fully represented in ICD-11 by precoordinated codes or postcoordination. Conclusion In ICD-11, there is a moderate increase in the number of codes over ICD-10. With postcoordination, it is possible to fully represent the meaning of a high proportion of ICD-10-CM codes, especially with the addition of a limited number of extension codes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 153473542090833 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung-hoon Choi

In 2019, the World Health Assembly approved the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11), which included a traditional medicine chapter. This means that traditional medicine (TM) is incorporated into the mainstream medicine of the world. For TM to contribute to human health, the role of ICD-11, chapter 26 (ICD-11-26), is important. Since the ICD-11-26 is “a union set of harmonized traditional medicine conditions of the Chinese, Japanese, and Korean classifications,” it is advisable to supplement the essential patterns while maintaining the already adopted patterns. The ICD-11-26 was originated from the World Health Organization International Standard Terminologies on Traditional Medicine in the Western Pacific Region (WHO-IST), and the WHO-IST is the world’s most authoritative TM standard terminology system with an emphasis on traditional and conventional expression. In addition, it includes patterns that are widely used in TM clinical practice and have representative prescriptions at the same time. Therefore, future revisions of ICD-11-26 should make WHO-IST the main reference. Based on this spirit, this proposed revision is a modification of ICD-11-26’s structure, order, and expression (English translation) with more essential patterns.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document