<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Exploratory Reverse Mapping of ICD-10-CA to SNOMED CT</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Dennis Lee, M.Sc., Francis Lau, Ph.D. School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Victoria, B.C.</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="CA">Canada</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2008</year>
      </pub-date>
      <fpage>44</fpage>
      <lpage>49</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>This paper describes the findings of an exploratory study on reverse mapping of ICD-10-CA, the Canadian Adaptation, to SNOMED CT. For this study a set of 5,000 most frequent ICD-10-CA codes from the health ministry of a Canadian province was used. The methods included applying six mapping algorithms to each ICD-10-CA description to find the matching SNOMED CT concepts, and comparing the output against the UK SCT-ICD10 cross map for accuracy. Overall, we found successful SNOMED CT matches for ~63% of the ICD-10-CA codes. Issues requiring further attention include ways to increase successful matches and independent validation of mapping output. This study provides a glimpse of the methods that could lead to a SNOMED CT to ICD10-CA cross map. It should be of interest to those responsible for secondary use of discharge abstracts in epidemiological and statistical reporting.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        The Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical
Terms (SNOMED CT) is a terminology system used
to capture information relating to a patient’s
condition and care in a consistent manner. Currently,
there are ~376000 concepts in SNOMED CT,
organized into 19 hierarchies such as clinical finding,
observations, body structure and social context.
There are another ~1 million commonly used terms
to describe these concepts, and ~1.4 million semantic
relationships to define the logical connections
between concepts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        While SNOMED CT is the terminology of choice for
capturing details of a clinical encounter, it is
considered too fine grained for non-clinical purposes
such as the reporting of resource use and billing.
Many have advocated the need to link SNOMED CT
to established classification systems, such as the
International Statistical Classification of Diseases
and Related Health Problems Version 10 (ICD-10),
that are already used extensively in statistical
reporting [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2 ref3">2,3</xref>
        ]. Currently there is a cross map from
SNOMED CT to ICD-10 in the UK, and one to
ICD9-CM (Clinical Modification) in the United States.
Neither of these maps have been validated externally,
and no map exists for ICD-10-CA, the Canadian
Adaptation. There are other cross maps that have
been created for specific domains including the
SNOMED-to-ICD-O map for oncology, the
SNOMED-to-LOINC map for laboratory test results,
and those for nursing terminologies. Otherwise there
is limited experience in cross mapping from
SNOMED CT to existing classification systems to
facilitate secondary uses.
      </p>
      <p>In this paper, we describe the initial findings of an
exploratory study to create a reverse map from
ICD10-CA to SNOMED CT. It originated as part of a
Master of Science project by the lead author. We
contend that reverse mapping could be one way to
produce the SNOMED CT to ICD-10-CA cross map.
This paper describes the mapping algorithms and
process used, the key results on matches found, and
the lessons and implications from the study.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>METHODS</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Overview of ICD-10-CA</title>
      <p>
        The ICD-10-CA is an enhanced version of the
ICD10 published by the World Health Organization
(WHO). The ICD-10-CA has 23 chapters and is used
for classifying morbidity, diseases, injuries and
causes of death in Canada. It also covers non-disease
situations and conditions that pose a risk to health
including occupational and environmental factors,
lifestyle and psycho-social circumstances. The
ICD10-CA has an alphanumeric coding format of 3-6
characters. The major difference between ICD-10
and ICD-10-CA is that the latter has two additional
chapters: XXII on morphology of neoplasms and
XXIII on provisional codes for research and
temporary assignment. There are also minor changes
in some chapters in the form of addition, subdivision,
deletion and revision of selected ICD codes [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Source Mapping Terms</title>
      <p>For this study, we obtained a set of 5,000 most
frequently reported ICD-10-CA codes and their long
descriptions for the fiscal year of 2005/06 from the
health ministry of a Canadian province. These source
mapping terms were from inpatient separations in
acute care settings including designated sub-acute
care facilities for patients that require more care and
time before returning home. The profile of the
discharge abstracts for the 5,000 ICD-10-CA codes
selected for the study is in Table 1.</p>
      <p>Description
Total separations 2005/06 in province
Total diagnosis codes reported
Average no. of codes reported per separation
Total discrete diagnosis codes (all)
Frequency of top 5,000 diagnosis codes
% of total diagnosis in top 5000 codes
% of total discrete diagnosis in top 5000 codes
Total discrete most responsible diagnosis codes
Table 1. Profile of the Discharge Abstracts
Count
364,977
1,481,285</p>
      <p>4.1
10,529
1,460,730
98.6%
47.5%
6,651</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Mapping Algorithms</title>
      <p>After conducting a detailed review of the literature
on cross mapping of terminology systems, we
adopted five related mapping algorithms and created
Web-based versions of these algorithms in to find
matching SNOMED concepts for each of the
ICD10-CA descriptions in the data set [5]. Four of the
algorithms are lexical techniques for exact-match,
match-all-words-only, match-all-words and
partialmatch. The fifth is semantic matching that involves
retrieving the current concepts based on entries in the
SNOMED historical relationship table if the initial
concepts found are inactive. These mapping
algorithms are summarized in Table 2.</p>
      <p>Algorithm Explanation
1. Exact match Exact string match where all words are
same and in same sequence for both source
and target terms, including punctuation
2. Match all only String match where all words are same but
not necessary in same order; additional
words not allowed in target term
3. Match all String match where all words are same but
not necessary in same order; additional
words allowed in target term
4. Partial match String match where one or more words in
source term is found in target term
5. Semantic match For inactive concepts found use historical
relationships of Was-A Same-As,
May-Be</p>
      <p>A, Replaced-By to find current concepts
6. Unmappable Assigned when no match is found</p>
      <p>Table 2. Mapping algorithms used in this study</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Normalization Steps</title>
      <p>In addition to using the original SNOMED CT terms
and the ICD-10-CA long descriptions in mapping, we
normalized all of these original terms to remove
“noise” such as genitives and spelling errors using
the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS)
normalization steps, as shown in Table 3a [6]. To
improve successful mapping, we expanded step-2 to
remove both “stop words” and “exclude words,” as
well as SNOMED prefixes, shown in Table 3b. For
step-5 we included both the lookup and stemming
methods to uninflect the phrase. The lookup method
uses the UMLS SPECIALIST Lexicon’s inflection
table with ~1 million entries, whereas the stemming
method uses the computational technique first
published by Porter Stemming that reduces word
variants to a single canonical form [7,8].</p>
      <p>Steps 1 to 6 Example
Remove genitive Hodgkin’s disease, NOS o Hodgkin
diseases, NOS
Remove stop words Hodgkin diseases, NOS o Hodgkin
diseases,
Convert to lowercase Hodgkin diseases, o hodgkin diseases,
Strip punctuation hodgkin diseases, o hodgkin diseases
Uninflect phrase hodgkin diseases o hodgkin disease
Sort words hodgkin disease o disease hodgkin
Table 3a. UMLS six normalization steps[7, slide 20]
SNOMED
Prefixes
Step-2
Stop
words
Exclude
words</p>
      <p>Explanation
Frequent short words that do not affect the phrase:
and, by, for, in, of, on, the, to, with, no, and (nos)
Words that may change meaning of the word but if
ignored help to locate a term otherwise missed:
about, alongside, an, anything, around, as, at,
because, before, being, both, cannot, chronically,
consists, covered, does, during, every, find, from,
instead, into, more, must, no, not, only, or, properly,
side, sided, some, something, specific, than, that,
things, this, throughout, up, using, usually, when,
while, without
[X] – concepts with ICD-10 codes not in ICD-9
[D] – concepts in ICD-9 XVI and ICD-10 SVII
[M] – morphology of neoplasm concepts in ICD-O
[SO] – concepts in OPCS-4 chapter Z in CTV3
[Q] – temporary qualifying terms from CTV3
[V] – concepts in ICD-9 and ICD-10 on factors
influencing health status and contact with health
services (V-codes and Z-codes)</p>
      <p>Table 3b. Expanded UMLS normalization step-2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>Reverse Mapping Process</title>
      <p>The reverse mapping of ICD-10-CA terms to
SNOMED CT concepts involved cycling through the
mapping algorithms one at a time to find the best
candidate SNOMED CT concepts as the target terms.
For each algorithm we always started with the
original terms, then the UMLS normalized terms,
followed by the stemmed terms. In each cycle, we
would review the candidate concepts found to see if
it was a match, and if so, what type of match it was
based on the algorithm applied. When no matching
concepts were found, we would label the term as
unmappable. Our experience with the matching
techniques was that, the sooner we could find a
match in the cycle, i.e. first-match, the greater
confidence we would have that the candidate concept
is appropriate. The preferred order of matched terms
was always exact-match first, match-all-only, then
match-all, with partial-match last. Whenever inactive
concepts were found a semantic-match was done to
find the current concepts through their historical
relationships. During mapping we tallied frequency
statistics on the different types of matches with
summary/detailed outputs. Only the first-matches
were counted to determine the effectiveness of each
mapping algorithm.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>Comparison with UK SCT-ICD10 Map</title>
      <p>
        To determine the accuracy of the mapping results
from this study, we compared our output with the UK
SNOMED CT to ICD-10 (SCT-ICD10) cross map.
To do so, the 5,000 ICD-10-CA codes were matched
with the TargetCodes of the SCT_CrossMapTargets
table from the July 2007 version of the IHTSDO
distribution set [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. While the UK cross map is from
SNOMED CT to ICD-10 and not ICD-10-CA, the
two ICD versions share many similar codes. Thus, if
the ICD-10-CA code was found among the
TargetCodes of the UK map, we would look up the
SCT_CrossMaps table to find the corresponding
SNOMED concepts. If multiple similar SNOMED
concepts were found, they would be filtered to
include only the unique SNOMED concepts. Each of
the concepts found were then compared with our
mapping output from matches found by the
exactmatch, match-all-only and match-all algorithms.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>RESULTS</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>Summary of Mapping Output</title>
      <p>Of the 5,000 ICD-10-CA descriptions used in this
study, we were able to match 1,619 source ICD terms
(32.38%) to 2,625 target SNOMED concepts by the
exact-match technique. Next, we matched 63 ICD
terms (1.26%) to 87 SNOMED concepts by
matchall-only; another 1,478 ICD terms to 4,829 concepts
by match-all; and 1,839 ICD terms to ~25 million
concepts by partial-match. One ICD term C8800
Waldenstr was umappable. A summary of the
mapping output by match-type is shown in Table 4.
Match Type
Exact match
Match all only
Match all
Partial match
Unmappable
Total</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>Detailed Analysis of Mapping Output</title>
      <p>Each ICD term was cycled through all the matching
techniques to determine the number of candidate
target SNOMED concepts found for each match type.
The first-match reported for each match type
excluded the target concepts already identified in
previous iterations to avoid duplicate counting. We
tracked not only the total matches but also which
technique found the first match. The output produced
suggested exact-match, match-all-only and match-all
could be considered as successful matches, since they
returned one or more identical or similar SNOMED
concepts based on the ICD term provided. The
number of first-matches found for these match types
by ICD Chapter are shown in the Appendix. One can
see that the percentages of matches were very low for
Chapters IV Endocrine, nutritional and metabolic
diseases at 36%; XIII Diseases of the musculoskeletal
system and connective tissue at ~36%; and XV
Pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium at ~4%.
Of the overall 3,160 ICD terms or ~63% that were
mapped to one or more SNOMED concepts, most
were found by exact-match and match-all during the
first-match. The profiles of first-matches found by
each match type are briefly described below.
Exact Match – Table 5 shows 1,237 original ICD
terms had exact-matches with 2,064 candidate
concepts. Another 364 ICD terms had exact-matches
with 527 concepts using the UMLS normalized
version, and 18 ICD with 34 concepts using the
stemmed version. In all, 2,625 candidate SNOMED
concepts were found, which means that there were
multiple exact matches for some of the ICD terms.</p>
      <p>Match All Words First Match
Original Term 1,343
UMLS Version 114
Stemmed Version 21</p>
      <p>Total 1,478</p>
      <p>Table 7. Match all words output
Exact Match First Match
Original Term 1,237
UMLS Version 364
Stemmed Version 18</p>
      <p>Total 1,619</p>
      <p>Table 5. Exact match output
Match All Only – Table 6 shows 33 original ICD
terms had match-all-only with 48 candidate concepts;
29 UMLS normalized terms had 37 concepts, and 1
stemmed term had 2 only. In all, 87 candidate
SNOMED concepts were found, which means that
there were multiple match-all-only for some terms.
Match All Words Only First Match
Original Term 33
UMLS Version 29
Stemmed Version 1</p>
      <p>Total 63</p>
      <p>Table 6. Match all only output
Match All Words – Table 7 shows 1,343 original
ICD terms had match-all with 4,558 candidate
concepts; 114 UMLS normalized terms had 217
concepts, and 21 stemmed terms had 54. In all, 4,829
SNOMED concepts were found, which means that
there were multiple match-all for some terms.</p>
      <p>Partial Match – Table 8 shows 1,839 ICD terms had
partial-matches with 25 million SNOMED concepts.
We found the results of partial matches to be more
unpredictable than the previous match types. If a
source term was long and contains common words
such as disorder or procedure, the results returned
could be numerous as only one word from the source
term needed to be present in the target term.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-12">
      <title>Comparison with SCT-ICD10 Map</title>
      <p>Six comparisons were made between our mapping
output and the UK map to see if: (a) both contained
the same results; (b) both contained similar results;
(c) both contained dissimilar results; (d) only UK
map contained the results; (e) only our mapping
output contained the results; (f) both had unmappable
results. The overall results are shown in Table 9.
Only (b), (c) and (f) are illustrated in this paper.
Similar Results - Where both maps contained
similar results, the UK map usually had more mapped
terms than our output, as shown in Table 10. An
example is with the ICD term Q61.2 Polycystic
kidney, autosomal dominant where the UK map had
six SNOMED concepts but only four in ours.
Description
UK map had more results than mapping outputs
Mapping outputs had more results than UK map
UK and mapping outputs had same no. of results</p>
      <p>Total
ConceptId Fully Specified Name UK
66091009 Congenital disease (disorder) ¥
204955006 Polycystic kidney disease ¥
204962002 Multicystic kidney (disorder) ¥
28728008 Polycystic kidney disease, adult ¥ ¥
type (disorder)
253878003 Adult type polycystic kidney ¥ ¥
disease type I (disorder)
253879006 Adult type polycystic kidney ¥ ¥
disease type II (disorder)
274567009 [EDTA] Polycystic kidneys, adult
type (dominant) associated with
renal failure (disorder)
Table 10. Comparing both with similar results
Total
2,125
224
63
2,401
CA
¥</p>
      <p>Dissimilar Results – Where both had dissimilar
results, our output were more specific as each
concept must contain all the words in the source
term. For 100 (82%) of these terms the UK map had
more candidate concepts; for 9 terms (7.4%) both had
same number of concepts; whereas for 13 (10.7%)
our mapping output had more concepts. An example
is the ICD term S597 Multiple injuries of forearm,
shown in Table 11, where both maps had four
concepts but none are similar.</p>
      <p>ConceptId
122549002</p>
      <p>Fully Specified Name
Injury (disorder)
UK
¥</p>
      <p>CA
210860005
211290004
212308001
212464002
Unmappable Results – These were in almost every
ICD chapter but most notable in XVII: Congenital
malformations, deformations and chromosomal
abnormalities; XIX: Injury, poisoning and certain
other consequences of external causes; and XIII:
Diseases of the musculoskeletal system and
connective issue (Table 12). It is possible these ICD
terms have further refinement making it difficult to
find concept and lexical matches. An example is the
ICD-10-CA term O2450 Pre-existing Type 1 diabetes
mellitus arising in pregnancy, which could be refined
as: delivered with or without antepartum condition
(1), delivered with postpartum complication (2), or
antepartum condition or complication (3).</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-13">
      <title>DISCUSSION</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-14">
      <title>Lessons and Issues</title>
      <p>This study was our initial effort to apply a set of
mapping algorithms on a set of ICD-10-CA terms to
find the matching target SNOMED concepts. Our
output showed most of the matches were found using
the exact-match and match-all algorithms. The
match-all-words-only algorithm did not add a great
deal to the number of matches found, and the
partialmatch was considered too unpredictable with respect
to the candidate target concepts returned. Due to
space limitation, we did not report on additional
matches found after normalization with UMLS and
stemming techniques were applied to the original
ICD terms, or those found by semantic matching.
A major issue is how one should define “successful
match.” In our output we had just over 60% of the
matches found by exact-match and match-all, which
we reviewed and deemed correct. However, more
formal validation preferably by an independent
source is needed. While our results showed
successful matches in only ~63% of the 5,000
ICD10-CA codes, we were surprised to find the UK cross
map had similar successful matches of ~68% against
the same 5,000 ICD-10-CA codes (see Table 9).
Equally intriguing were the different matches found
between the two maps. Almost 50% of the concepts
found were similar but not identical, whereas ~20%
were dissimilar or found only in the UK map. One
possible explanation is the minor differences that
exist between ICD-10 and ICD-10-CA with respect
to the addition, subdivision, deletion and revision
made in some ICD-10-CA chapters. Another is that a
concept-based method was used to create the UK
cross map, which seemed to outperform the lexical
techniques in this study. One possible solution to
improve mapping precision is to combine methods,
such as the use of semantic and lexical mapping
between SNOMED CT and ICD-9-CM by Fung.9
Another issue is the extent that our semi-automated
matching algorithms can aide in the cross-mapping
process by health records staff when encoding the
inpatient discharge abstracts. The current abstracting
process is mostly an intellectual and manual exercise.
As such, explicit cross-mapping guidelines need to
be established, including the use of any
computerbased mapping tools, to improve this abstracting
process. With our mapping algorithms, a
consensusbased process is needed for the health record staff to
verify the accuracy of the ~63% successful matches.
Guidelines are also needed to reconcile the remaining
~37% partially-matched terms.2,10</p>
      <p>Still, we contend there is merit in exploring the use of
reverse mapping with lexical algorithms to identify
candidate SNOMED concepts for a given set of
ICD10-CA terms. Our next steps are to enhance the
mapping algorithms to include contexts, incorporate
these algorithms into the abstracting process, and
conduct further field evaluation. Last, the idea of
applying reverse mapping to identify candidate
SNOMED CT concepts for a set of mapping terms
can be a helpful approach when creating a cross map
from SNOMED CT to another terminology system.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-15">
      <title>Implications</title>
      <p>This study provides a glimpse of the feasible
mapping methods that could eventually lead to a
SNOMED CT to ICD-10-CA cross map for Canada.
We believe the intent, methods and results of this
current study should be of interest to those
responsible for secondary use of patient discharge
abstracts in epidemiological and statistical reporting.
The notion of reverse mapping is also highly
generalizable to include the encoding of local terms
that already exist in legacy systems within many
health organizations to a reference terminology such
as SNOMED CT.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-16">
      <title>Acknowledgments</title>
      <p>We wish to thank the Provincial Ministry that
provided the 5,000 ICD-10-CA codes for the study.</p>
      <p>We also thank Ms. Robyn Kuropatwa in facilitating
the process to obtain the ICD codes from the
ministry. Funding support for this work was provided
by the Canadian Institutes for Health Research
through its Strategic Training Initiative. Note that the
views presented in this paper are those of the authors
only and do not represent the official position of any
Canadian government agencies.</p>
      <p>Appendix. Mapping Output for top 5,000 ICD-10-CA codes by ICD Chapter
Chapter</p>
      <p>Title
Source Exact</p>
      <p>Only
III
IV
V
VI
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
XVII
XVIII
XIX
XX
XXI
XXII</p>
      <p>Lee DHK. Reverse Mapping ICD-10-CA to
SNOMED CT. UVic Master of Science research
project report, Oct 2007. Unpublished.</p>
      <p>National Library of Medicine. The SPECIALIST
Lexicon.
http://lexsr3.nlm.nih.gov/LexSysGroup/Projects/
Summary/lexicon.html
Kleinsorge R, Willis J, et al. UMLS Overview –
Tutorial T12. AMIA Annual Symposium 2006.
http://165.112.6.70/research/umls/pdf/AMIA_T1
2_2006_UMLS.pdf. Jan15/2006.</p>
      <p>Goldsmith JA, Higgins D, Soglasnova S.</p>
      <p>Automatic Language-specific Stemming in
Information Retrieval. Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg 2001.</p>
      <p>Certain infections and parasitic disease
Neoplasms
Diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs and certain disorders
involving the immune mechanism
Endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases
Mental and behavioural disorders
Diseases of the nervous system
Diseases of the eye and adnexa
Diseases of the ear and mastoid process
Diseases of the circulatory system
Diseases of the respiratory system
Diseases of the digestive system
Diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue
Diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue
Diseases of the genitourinary system
Pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium
Certain conditions originating in the perinatal period
Congenital malformations, deformations, chromosomal abnormalities
Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings not
elsewhere classified
Injury, poisoning and certain other consequences of external causes
External causes of morbidity and mortality
Factors influencing health status and contact with health services
Morphology of neoplasms
A00-B99
D50-D89
M00-M99
8000/09989/1
136
343
80
225
218
196
89
42
279
165
276
105
383
226
313
169
205
181
691
297
333
28
20
47
174
35
56
66
75
56
24
136
67
136
120
42
78
5
57
105
99
175
9
29
28
2
1
1
3
1
3
1
4
9
1
3
1
2
2
8
4
17
141
57
58
20
24
56
18
11
74
41
56
20
61</p>
      <p>Provisional codes for research and temporary assignment</p>
      <p>Total</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1. IHTSDO,
          <source>International Health Terminology Standards Development Organization. SNOMED Clinical Terms Technical Reference Guide</source>
          . International Release,
          <year>July 2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bowman</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Coordination of SNOMED CT and ICD-10: Getting the Most out of Electronic Health Record Systems</article-title>
          . Perspectives in Health Information Management,
          <year>Spring 2005</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>McBride</surname>
            <given-names>S</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gilder</surname>
            <given-names>R</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <article-title>Data mapping</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of American Health Information Management Association</source>
          <year>2006</year>
          ;
          <volume>77</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>44</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>48</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4. CIHI,
          <article-title>Canadian Institute for Health Information</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Canadian Coding Standards for ICD-10-CA and CCI for 2006</article-title>
          . Ottawa, Canada.
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fung</surname>
            <given-names>KW</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bodenreider</surname>
            <given-names>O</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Aronson</surname>
            <given-names>AR</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hole</surname>
            <given-names>WT</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Srinivasan</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Combining lexical and semantic methods of inter-terminology mapping using the UMLS</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>In Kuhn K</article-title>
          . et al.
          <source>(Eds) MedInfo</source>
          <year>2007</year>
          ,
          <fpage>p605</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>610</lpage>
          . IOS Press,
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vikstrom</surname>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Skaner</surname>
            <given-names>Y</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <article-title>Mapping of the categories of the Swedish primary health care version of ICD-10 to SNOMED CT concepts: Rule development and intercoder reliability in a mapping trial</article-title>
          .
          <source>BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making</source>
          <year>2007</year>
          ;
          <volume>7</volume>
          :
          <fpage>9</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>