arXiv preprint ·
Decomposing Error and Style in Automated Clinical Coding
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
In automated clinical coding, where the label space spans tens of thousands of diagnosis and procedure codes, models are currently evaluated against a single gold annotation, treating any deviation as error. But we find when two teams code the same 110 ACI-Bench encounters, they agree on only 73% of codes (Jaccard similarity) for the same note; even after an independent clinical audit removes erroneous codes, agreement rises only to 77%. Is that gap error or something systematic? We model the systematic component as coding style $ψ$, a coder- or site-specific policy over what to code and how much to document, and recast coding as $p(\mathrm{code}\mid\mathrm{note},ψ)$, estimating $ψ$ with a 10-dimension rubric. If style were noise, conditioning on it would do nothing. Instead, across five datasets a model conditioned with a data-matching style raises ICD F1 by up to 26 points and an extreme mismatched one lowers it by up to 21. Four prompt based coding methods spanning 39-49 F1 converge to 52-56 once style is supplied (All p<0.05). Much of what single-gold evaluation charges to model error is recoverable, unmodeled style.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
Some Dialects Are More Equal Than Others: Non-Prestigious Arabic Dialectal Bias in LLMs
Matryoshka attribution: Learning to attribute language model outputs to representations and weights
Open-Jev Judgments on CallScreenBench: Calibrated One-Pass Scam Screening with a Small Language Model
Compressing Long Context into Answer-Aligned Memory Embeddings for LLM Inference
From Tables to Quantified Statements: Evaluating LLM Inference Generation through Executable Verification
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.