A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Implications of mappings between International Classification of Diseases clinical diagnosis codes and Human Phenotype Ontology terms. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The integration of electronic health record (EHR) data with other resources is crucial for rare disease research, relying on the compatibility of ontologies like ICD (for clinical diagnoses) and HPO (for phenotypes).
  • An analysis showed only 2.2% of ICD codes have direct mappings to HPO in UMLS, and less than 50% of ICD codes in a real-world EHR dataset are mapped to HPO, indicating gaps, especially for rarer conditions.
  • The study concludes that interoperability between ICD and HPO is limited, with a need for more established mapping conventions beyond UMLS to enhance data integration.

Article Abstract

Objective: Integrating electronic health record (EHR) data with other resources is essential in rare disease research due to low disease prevalence. Such integration is dependent on the alignment of ontologies used for data annotation. The international classification of diseases (ICD) is used to annotate clinical diagnoses, while the human phenotype ontology (HPO) is used to annotate phenotypes. Although these ontologies overlap in the biomedical entities they describe, the extent to which they are interoperable is unknown. We investigate how well aligned these ontologies are and whether such alignments facilitate EHR data integration.

Materials And Methods: We conducted an empirical analysis of the coverage of mappings between ICD and HPO. We interpret this mapping coverage as a proxy for how easily clinical data can be integrated with research ontologies such as HPO. We quantify how exhaustively ICD codes are mapped to HPO by analyzing mappings in the unified medical language system (UMLS) Metathesaurus. We analyze the proportion of ICD codes mapped to HPO within a real-world EHR dataset.

Results And Discussion: Our analysis revealed that only 2.2% of ICD codes have direct mappings to HPO in UMLS. Within our EHR dataset, less than 50% of ICD codes have mappings to HPO terms. ICD codes that are used frequently in EHR data tend to have mappings to HPO; ICD codes that represent rarer medical conditions are seldom mapped.

Conclusion: We find that interoperability between ICD and HPO via UMLS is limited. While other mapping sources could be incorporated, there are no established conventions for what resources should be used to complement UMLS.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11570992PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooae118DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

icd codes
24
ehr data
12
mappings hpo
12
icd
9
hpo
9
international classification
8
classification diseases
8
human phenotype
8
phenotype ontology
8
icd hpo
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!