Trouble with timelines (2) Might APA hold back DSM-5 in response to an October 2014 ICD-10-CM compliance date?

Posted on August 15, 2012 by meagenda

Trouble with timelines (2): Might APA hold back publication of DSM-5 in response to a firm October 2014 ICD-10-CM compliance date?

Post #200 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2sW

Update at August 17: Commentary on DSM-5 from One Boring Old Man: didn’t need to happen…

Update at August 16: Commentary on DSM-5 from One Boring Old Man: all quiet on the western front…

+++

In Trouble with timelines (1): DSM-5, ICD-10-CM, ICD-11 and ICD-11-CM, on August 10, I wrote

With no changes to the published Timeline and no intimation of further delays, I’m assuming DSM-5 remains on target.

But it’s not necessarily a given that DSM-5 will be on the bookshelves for May 2013.

Roger Peele, M.D., D.L.F.A.P.A, has been a member of the DSM-5 Task Force since 2006. From 2007- 2010, Dr Peele was APA Trustee-At-Large; since 2010, Secretary to the APA Board of Trustees.

Dr Peele maintains a website at http://rogerpeele.com/index.asp providing clinical information for Montgomery County clinicians, resources for County residents and listing some of the initiatives taken relative to the American Psychiatric Association:

http://rogerpeele.com/

Writing just a few days after HHS Secretary’s announcement of intent to postpone the compliance date for adoption of ICD-10-CM/PCS codes sets for a further year, to October 1, 2014, Dr Peele informed his readers that the proposal to delay the compliance deadline

“…reduces some of the pressures to publish DSM-5 in 2013.”

In his post of February 23, Dr Peele goes on to say that a more certain answer was expected on February 28, but that remarks at the previous day’s American College of Psychiatrists meeting suggested the timing of DSM-5 for early 2013 was still on.

This suggests to me that if HHS decides not to take forward its proposal to delay ICD-10-CM compliance until October 1, 2014 but to stick with the original compliance date of October 1, 2013, that APA will still want to get its manual out several months ahead of the ICD-10-CM compliance deadline.

In order to meet a publication date of May 2013, APA says the final manual text will need to be with the publishers by December, this year. So unless HHS announces a decision within the next few weeks, APA isn’t going to have very much time left in which to dither over potentially shifting publication to 2014.

ICD-10-CM will be freely available online and is already accessible for pre implementation viewing. It’s the policy of WHO, Geneva, to make print versions of ICD publications globally available at reasonable cost. Although ICD-10-CM has been developed by US committees for US specific use, it’s not expected that print versions of ICD-10-CM will be as expensive as DSM-5.

DSM manuals are expensive; they are a commercial product generating substantial income for the APA’s publishing arm. APA will be looking to maximize sales and publication revenue and retain market share with this forthcoming edition.

There are already groups and petitions calling for the boycotting of DSM-5 in favour of using Chapter 5 of ICD-10-CM, when its code sets are operationalized.

So if ICD-10-CM is to be adopted by October 1, 2013, I cannot see APA and American Psychiatric Publishing not aiming to steal a march.

If, on the other hand, HHS were to announce shortly a firm rule that compliance for ICD-10-CM is being pushed back to October 2014, if DSM-5 Task Force and work groups are struggling to finalize the manual or having problems obtaining approval for some of their more contentious proposals from the various panels that are scrutinizing the near final draft, then delaying publication of DSM-5 to late 2013 or spring 2014 would provide APA with a window in which to complete its manual but still push it out ahead of ICD-10-CM.

Its PR firm can sell a publication delay to end-users as the APA’s taking the opportunity of postponement of ICD-10-CM compliance to allow more time for evaluation of DSM-5 field trial results, refinement of criteria or honing disorder description texts, and that a delay will better facilitate harmonization efforts with ICD-10-CM and ICD-11.

(ICD-10-CM is a modification of the WHO’s ICD-10 and has closer correspondence with DSM-IV than with DSM-5. Since 2003, ICD-9-CM diagnostic codes have been mandated by HIPAA for all electronic reporting and transactions for third-party billing and reimbursement and DSM-5 codes will need to be crosswalked to ICD-9-CM codes, for the remaining life of the ICD-9-CM. DSM-5 codes will also need to be convertible to ICD-10-CM codes for all electronic transactions.)

In a June 2011 presentation to the International Congress of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, APA President, John M. Oldham, MD, MS, spoke of “Negotiations in progress to ‘harmonize’ DSM-5 with ICD-11 and to ‘retro-fit’ these codes into ICD-10-CM” and that DSM-5 would need “to include ICD-10-CM ‘F-codes’ in order to process all insurance claims beginning October 1, 2011.”

With the drafting timelines for the three systems now so out of whack and a partial code freeze on ICD-10-CM, and with ICD-11 still at the Beta drafting stage, I can no longer be bothered to attempt to unscramble how alignment of the three systems [or best fit where no corresponding category exists] is going to dovetail, in practice, pre and post publication, or what the implications might be for the medical billing and coding industry, for clinicians and for patients.

Dr Peele then says

“Since ICD-11-CM is due in 2016, it may become appealing to the Feds to skip ICD-10-CM, and wait until 2016″

ICD-11-CM due in 2016?

Not so. It is the WHO’s ICD-11 that is aiming for readiness by 2016.

A misconception on the part of Dr Peele or wishful thinking?

It might suit the interests of APA and American Psychiatric Publishing, financially and politically, if ICD-10-CM were to be thrown overboard and instead, the US skip to a Clinical Modification of ICD-11, two or three years after a copy of its shiny new DSM-5 is sitting on every psychiatrist’s desk.

But that is not going to happen in 2016.

There is strong federal opposition, in any case, against leapfrogging over ICD-10-CM to a US modification of ICD-11:

Federal Register, January 16, 2009:

…We [ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee] discussed waiting to adopt the ICD-11 code set in the August 22, 2008 proposed rule (73 FR 49805)…

…However, work cannot begin on developing the necessary U.S. clinical modification to the ICD–11 diagnosis codes or the ICD–11 companion procedure codes until ICD–11 is officially released. Development and testing of a clinical modification to ICD–11 to make it usable in the United States will take an estimated additional 5 to 6 years. We estimated that the earliest projected date to begin rulemaking for implementation of a U.S. clinical modification of ICD–11 would be the year 2020.

The suggestion that we wait and adopt ICD–11 instead of ICD–10–CM and ICD–10–PCS does not consider that the alpha-numeric structural format of ICD–11 is based on that of ICD–10, making a transition directly from ICD–9 to ICD–11 more complex and potentially more costly. Nor would waiting until we could adopt ICD–11 in place of the adopted standards address the more pressing problem of running out of space in ICD–9–CM Volume 3 to accommodate new procedure codes…

And from a more recent Federal Register document:

Federal Register, April 17, 2012:

3. Option 3: Forgo ICD-10 and Wait for ICD-11

…The option of foregoing a transition from ICD-9 to ICD-10, and instead waiting for ICD-11, was another alternative that was considered. This option was eliminated from consideration because the World Health Organization, which creates the basic version of the medical code set from which all countries create their own specialized versions, is not expected to release the basic ICD-11 medical code set until 2015 at the earliest.

From the time of that release, subject matter experts state that the transition from ICD-9 directly to ICD-11 would be more difficult for industry and it would take anywhere from 5 to 7 years for the United States to develop its own ICD-11 CM and ICD-11-PCS versions.

From an interview with Christopher Chute, MD, Making the Case for the ICD-10 Compliance Delay April 4, 2012, by Gabriel Perna for Healthcare Informatics:

“…Chute is also adamant that there is no possible reason or possibility that the U.S. could just skip over ICD-10 right into ICD-11. Even with his ties to ICD-11, Chute says there it’s not realistic, nor is it plausible, to have seven-to-nine more years of ICD-9 codes, while the medical industry waits for the World Health Organization to finish drafting ICD-11 and then waits for the U.S. to adapt it for its own use.”

A recent article in the JOURNAL OF AHIMA/July 2012/Volume 83, Number 7 in response to Chute et al [1] suggests the earliest the US could move onto a CM of ICD-11 might be 2025, or 13 years from now.

So, if HHS were to announce, soonish, a final rule for an October 1, 2014 ICD-10-CM compliance date, it’s not totally out of the question, in my view, that APA (who might be struggling to complete the manual for December) may extend its publication date for a second time.

References

1] There are important reasons for delaying implementation of the new ICD-10 coding system. Chute CG, Huff SM, Ferguson JA, Walker JM, Halamka JD. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Apr;31(4):836-42. Epub 2012 Mar 21 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22442180 (Abstract free; Subscription or payment required for full text)

Round up: ICD11-PHC, ICD-11 Classification of Mood and Anxiety Disorders, Monograph: Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders, ASHA DSM-5 comments

Posted on August 1, 2012 by meagenda

Round up: ICD11-PHC; ICD-11 Classification of Mood and Anxiety Disorders; Monograph: Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders; ASHA DSM-5 comments

1] Paper: The primary health care version of ICD-11: the detection of common mental disorders in general medical settings By David P. Goldberg, James J. Prisciandaro, Paul Williams

2] The ICD-11 Classification of Mood and Anxiety Disorders: background and options (Guest Editors: Mario Maj, Geoffrey M. Reed), World Psychiatry, Volume 11, Supplement 1, June 2012

3] Monograph: Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders: Refining the Research Agenda for DSM-5 and ICD-11 By Shekhar Saxena, Patricia Esparza, Darrel A. Regier, Norman Sartorius

4] Submissions to DSM-5 public reviews for drafts one, two and three by The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

Post #195 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2pa

This post relates to the World Health Organization’s ICD-11 and ICD11-PHC (Primary Care version), both currently under development. It does not apply to the existing ICD-10, ICD10-PHC or to the forthcoming US specific “clinical modification” of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

Note on ICD10-PHC and ICD11-PHC

The ICD10-PHC (Primary Care version) is a simplified version of the WHO’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) for use in general practice and primary health care settings. This condensed classification system has rough but not exact equivalence to the main ICD-10 classification.

For example, the ICD10-PHC mental and behavioural disorders chapter lists and describes 25 disorders commonly managed within primary care as opposed to circa 450 classified within Chapter V of ICD-10.

A chart showing the grouping of categories adapted from the full ICD-10 version for the existing ICD10-PHC categories can be found here.

The revision of ICD10-PHC, ICD11-PHC, is currently under development.

Professor, Sir David Goldberg, M.D., Emeritus Professor, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London, is a member of the DSM-5 Mood Disorders Work Group. Prof Goldberg also chairs the Consultation Group for Classification in Primary Care that is making recommendations for the mental and behavioural disorders section of ICD11-PHC.

The majority of patients with mental health problems are diagnosed and managed by general practitioners in primary care – not by psychiatrists and mental health specialists. ICD10-PHC is used in developed and developing countries in general medical settings and also used in the training of medical officers, nurses and multi purpose health workers.

Further information on ICD10-PHC and the development of the mental health disorders section of ICD11-PHC can be found in these two documents:

1] Goldberg, D. Guest editorial. A revised mental health classification for use in general medical settings: the ICD11–PHC 1. International Psychiatry, Page 1, February 2011.
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/IPv8n1.pdf

2] 21st Century Global Mental Health by Dr Eliot Sorel, Professor, George Washington University, Washington D.C.
Publication date: August, 2012: http://www.jblearning.com/catalog/9781449627874/
Page 51, Sample Chapter 2: http://samples.jbpub.com/9781449627874/Chapter2.pdf

ICD Revision publishes the names and bios of members of the ICD-11 Revision Steering Group, ICD-11 Topic Advisory Groups, and International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders.

But membership of the various sub working groups to the Topic Advisory Groups (TAGs), the names of external peer reviewers recruited by TAG Managing Editors for reviewing proposals and content and the membership of the advisory/consultation groups for the revision of the ICD Primary Care version have not been published by ICD-11 Revision.

The Abstract below lists members of the (WHO) Primary Care Consultation Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders.

1] Paper: The primary health care version of ICD-11: the detection of common mental disorders in general medical settings

http://www.ghpjournal.com/article/S0163-8343(12)00197-1/abstract

The primary health care version of ICD-11: the detection of common mental disorders in general medical settings

26 July 2012

David P. Goldberg, James J. Prisciandaro, Paul Williams

David P. Goldberg
Affiliations Primary Care Consultation Group, World Health Organization; and Institute of Psychiatry, KCL, London, UK

James J. Prisciandaro
Affiliations Department of Psychiatry, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston SC, USA
Corresponding author.

Paul Williams
Affiliations Health Services & Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, KCL, London, UK

Received 31 January 2012; accepted 19 June 2012. published online 26 July 2012.
Corrected Proof

Abstract

Background

The primary health care version of the ICD-11 is currently being revised.

Aim
To test two brief sets of symptoms for depression and anxiety in primary care settings, and validate them against diagnoses of major depression and current generalised anxiety made by the CIDI.

Method
The study took place in general medical or primary care clinics in 14 different countries, using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview adapted for primary care (CIDI-PC) in 5,438 patients. The latent structure of common symptoms was explored, and two symptom scales were derived from item response theory (IRT), these were then investigated against research diagnoses.

Results
Correlations between dimensions of anxious, depressive and somatic symptoms were found to be high. For major depression the 5 item depression scale has marked superiority over the usual 2 item scales used by both the ICD and DSM systems, and for anxiety there is some superiority. If the questions are used with patients that the clinician suspects may have a psychological disorder, the positive predictive value of the scale is between 78 and 90%.

Conclusion
The two scales allow clinicians to make diagnostic assessments of depression and anxiety with a high positive predictive value, provided they use them only when they suspect that a psychological disorder is present.

This article is partly based on the work of the World Health Organization (WHO) Primary Care Consultation Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders, of which the first author is Chair. Other members of the group include Michael Klinkman (GP, United States; Vice Chairman); Sally Chan (nurse, Singapore), Tony Dowell (GP, New Zealand) Sandra Fortes (psychiatrist, Brazil), Linda Gask (psychiatrist, UK), KS Jacob (psychiatrist, India), Tai-Pong Lam (GP, Hong Kong), Joseph Mbatia (psychiatrist, Tanzania), Fareed Minhas (psychiatrist, Pakistan), Marianne Rosendal (GP, Denmark), assisted by WHO Secretariat Geoffrey Reed and Shekhar Saxena. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and, except as specifically noted, are not intended to represent the official policies and positions of the Primary Care Consultation Group or of the WHO.

Competing interests: David Goldberg is a consultant for Ultrasis and advises the World Health Organization and the American Psychiatric Association.

James Prisciandaro and Paul Williams have no competing interests

PII: S0163-8343(12)00197-1

doi:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2012.06.006

+++
2] The ICD-11 Classification of Mood and Anxiety Disorders: background and options (Guest Editors: Mario Maj, Geoffrey M. Reed), World Psychiatry, Volume 11, Supplement 1, June 2012

The PDF of this publication is free.

Note regarding references within these commentaries to DSM-5 proposals: Some of these commentaries were written prior to the release of the third DSM-5 draft for public review, in May 2012, and quote draft proposals as they had stood for the second draft.

For example, the commentary Hypochondriasis in ICD-11 by D.J. Stein, on Page 100, sets out in narrative form the DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder Work Group proposals and criteria for Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder as they had stood in May 2011 and are not the most recent iteration.

DSM-5 proposals have not been finalized. Proposals as they stood in May 2012 for the third and final public review may be subject to further change before DSM-5 is published in May 2013. Please refer to the DSM-5 Development website for the most recent proposals and criteria sets for the categories and proposed categories that are discussed in these commentaries.

http://www.wpanet.org/uploads/WPA-WHO_Collaborative_Activities/WP_ICD-11%20Supplement.pdf

July 2012

The ICD-11 Classification of Mood and Anxiety Disorders: background and options (Guest Editors: Mario Maj, Geoffrey M. Reed) World Psychiatry, Volume 11, Supplement 1, June 2012

Contents

The development of the ICD-11 classification of mood and anxiety disorders

M. Maj, G.M. Reed Page 3

How global epidemiological evidence can inform the revision of ICD-10 classification of depression and anxiety disorders

L.H. Andrade, Y.-P. Wang Page 6

Specifiers as aids to treatment selection and clinical management in the ICD classification of mood disorders

D.J. Miklowitz, M.B. First Page 11

Challenges in the implementation of diagnostic specifiers for mood disorders in ICD-11

M.B. First Page 17

Cultural issues in the classification and diagnosis of mood and anxiety disorders

S. Chakrabarti, C. Berlanga, F. Njenga Page 26

Bipolar disorders in ICD-11

S.M. Strakowski Page 31

Changes needed in the classification of depressive disorders: options for ICD-11

E. Paykel, L.H. Andrade, F. Njenga, M.R. Phillips Page 37

Differentiating depression from ordinary sadness: contextual, qualitative and pragmatic approaches

M. Maj Page 43

Severity of depressive disorders: considerations for ICD-11

J.L. Ayuso-Mateos, P. Lopez-García Page 48

Dysthymia and cyclothymia in ICD-11

M.R. Phillips Page 53

Psychotic and catatonic presentations in bipolar and depressive disorders

S. Chakrabarti Page 59

Mixed states and rapid cycling: conceptual issues and options for ICD-11

M. Maj Page 65

How should melancholia be incorporated in ICD-11?

D. Moussaoui, M. Agoub, A. Khoubila Page 69

Postpartum depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder: options for ICD-11

M.L. Figueira, V. Videira Dias Page 73

Disruptive mood dysregulation with dysphoria disorder: a proposal for ICD-11

E. Leibenluft, R. Uher, M. Rutter Page 77

Generalized anxiety disorder in ICD-11

M.K. Shear Page 82

Agoraphobia and panic disorder: options for ICD-11

D.J. Stein Page 89

Specific and social phobias in ICD-11

P.M.G. Emmelkamp Page 94

Hypochondriasis in ICD-11

D.J. Stein Page 100

+++

3] Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders: Refining the Research Agenda for DSM-5 and ICD-11

Note: Substantial extracts from this DSM-5 and ICD-11 monograph can be previewed online on the Amazon site via the “LOOKINSIDE!” function. Greater access to preview content is available to Amazon account holders. Extracts can also be previewed via Google:

Preview via Amazon “LOOKINSIDE!”:

http://www.amazon.com/Aspects-Diagnosis-Classification-Behavioral-Disorders/dp/0890423490#reader_0890423490

Preview via Google Books:

http://tinyurl.com/DSM5-ICD11-Monograph

Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders: Refining the Research Agenda for Dsm-5 and ICD-11

By Shekhar Saxena, Patricia Esparza, Darrel A. Regier, Norman Sartorius

(c) 2012

Paperback: 303 pages
Publisher: American Psychiatric Publishing; 1 edition (April 30, 2012)

Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders: Refining the Research Agenda for DSM-5 and ICD-11
[Paperback]

Shekhar Saxena (Author), Patricia Esparza (Author), Darrel A. Regier (Author), Benedetto Saraceno (Author), Norman Sartorius (Author)

Shekhar Saxena, M.D.,is Director of the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse at the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland.

Patricia Esparza, Ph.D.,is Research Professor and clinical psychologist in the Department of Psychology and Counseling at Webster University in Geneva, Switzerland.

Darrel A. Regier, M.D., M.P.H.,is Director of the American Psychiatric Institute for Research and Education and Director of the Division of Research at the American Psychiatric Association in Arlington, Virginia; and Vice-Chair of the DSM-5 Task Force.

Benedetto Saraceno, M.D.,FRCPsych,is Professor of Psychiatry and Director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center on Mental Health of the University of Geneva in Geneva, Switzerland.

Norman Sartorius, M.D., Ph.D.,is President of the Association for the Improvement of Mental Health Programs in Geneva, Switzerland.

Book Description
Publication Date: April 30, 2012 | ISBN-10: 0890423490 | ISBN-13:
978-0890423493 | Edition: 1

“Public Health Aspects of Diagnosis and Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders: Refining the Research Agenda for DSM-5 and ICD-11″ provides a comprehensive summary of the current state of mental health classification in the United States and internationally, fostering a better understanding of primary research and clinical needs and facilitating the efforts of service planners, researchers and trainees to address current use of psychiatric diagnosis in the public health sector. The volume reflects the proceedings of a research planning conference convened by the APA and World Health Organization (WHO) that focused on public health aspects of the diagnosis and classification of mental disorders. Highly relevant to the ongoing development of DSM-5 and ICD-11, the book includes the background papers prepared and presented by the Conference Expert Groups. The resulting collection: – Discusses the current state of mental illness prevention efforts and the role of public health in supporting them–critical topics, given that development of effective strategies to reduce mental illness around the world depends on the accuracy with which risk and protective factors can be identified, defined, and understood. – Features international perspectives on public health implications of psychiatric diagnosis, classification, and service, providing viewpoints that are broad and more globally relevant. – Views mental health education, and awareness on a macro level, including its impact on social and economic policy, forensics and the legal system, and education. This approach facilitates the continued development of a research base in community health and promotes the establishment of programs for monitoring, treating, and preventing mental illness. – Addresses many fascinating and clinically relevant issues, such as those raised by the concept and the definition of mental disorders and how these impact psychiatric services and practice by individual providers.

This collection should prove useful to the advisory groups, task forces, and working groups for the revision of these two classifications, as well as for researchers in the area of diagnosis and classification, and more generally in public health.

+++
4] Submissions to DSM-5 public reviews for drafts one, two and three by The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) represents people with speech, language, and hearing disorders and advocates for services to help them communicate effectively.

ASHA submitted comments during all three DSM-5 draft comment periods:

ASHA submission April 2010 [PDF]; June 2011 [PDF]; June 2012 [PDF]

ASHA Letter sent June 2012 [PDF]

DSM-V Revisions To Move Forward (ASHA Leader article)

all documents available from this page:

http://www.asha.org/SLP/DSM-5/

+++

Key ICD-11 links and documents

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform | Publicly viewable version

WHO ICD Revision | Main WHO website: Revision Steering Group and Topic Advisory Groups
ICD-11 Revision site | Revision resources [Google site currently unavailable]
ICD-11 Revision site Documents Page | Key revision documents and meeting materials [Google site currently unavailable]

ICD-11 Revision Information |
ICD-11 Timeline |

ICD Information Sheet |

Revision News |
Steering Group |
Topic Advisory Groups |

ICD-11 YouTube Channel | Video reports
ICD-11 on Facebook |
ICD-11 on Twitter |
ICD-11 Blog | Not updated since October 2009

ICD-11 YouTubes collated on Dx Revision Watch ICD-11 YouTubes |

WHO Publications

ICD-10 Tabular List online Version: 2010 | International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision Version: 2010, Tabular List of inclusions and Chapter List

ICD-10 Volume 2: Instruction Manual | Volume 2 online Version: 2010 PDF Download

ICD-10 for Mental and Behavioural Disorders Diagnostic Criteria for Research | PDF download
ICD-10 for Mental and Behavioural Disorders Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines | PDF download

ICD-10 Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index | WHO does not make ICD-10 Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index available online

About the World Health Organization (WHO)

The WHO Family of International Classifications

History of ICD

ICD-11 Revision Beta drafting process: stakeholder participation

Posted on July 29, 2012 by meagenda

ICD-11 Revision Beta drafting process: stakeholder participation

Post #194 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2nw

Information in this report relates to the World Health Organization’s ICD-11, currently under development. It does not apply to the existing ICD-10 or to the forthcoming US specific “clinical modification” of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

Update at August 2, 2012:

ICD-11 Slide Presentation: Harrison Slides 2011 PDF 3MB

+++
Update at August 2, 2012:

Dr Robert J.G. Chalmers, co-chair and managing editor of ICD Revision Dermatology Topic Advisory Group put out a call, yesterday, on the website of the American Academy of Dermatology Association (AAD) for input into the Beta draft for Chapter 12 Diseases of the skin:

An invitation to contribute to the future of dermatology

ICD-11 Update

By Robert J.G. Chalmers

ICD-11 draft is ready for comments and criticism

By Robert J.G. Chalmers, MB, FRCP, August 01, 2012

+++

When will ICD-11 be ready for dissemination?

Slipping targets

The revision of ICD-10 and development of the structure for ICD-11 began in 2007.

ICD-11 was originally planned to be ready for dissemination by 2012, with the timelines for the revisions of ICD-10 and DSM-IV running more or less in parallel. Source: Archive documents, References [1] [2].

Very early on in the revision process, the ICD-11 dissemination date was extended from 2012 to 2015. In 2009, launch of the Beta draft was timelined for May 2011, with the final draft scheduled for submission to World Health Assembly (WPA) for approval in 2014.

In order to be ready for global implementation in 2015, the technical work on ICD-11 would need to be completed by 2012. Source: Dr Geoffrey Reed, Ph.D., May 2009, via personal correspondence.

+++

ICD-11 still at the Beta drafting stage

In early 2011, in response to slipping targets for content population and software development, ICD Revision and WHO-FIC were discussing the pros and cons of postponing the launch of a Beta drafting platform until later that year or until May 2012, and whether an interim solution might be to launch “a hybrid model of opening the revision process to public comment and suggestions at the same time not a full scale beta phase with field trials…”

Sources: Slide presentation: ICD Revision Paediatrics Meeting, Ankara, Turkey, February 28 - March 1, 2011;
Report: WHO-FIC Council conference call, February 16, 2011: Page 6: PDF for Report [3]

+++

Launch of the Beta delayed

The decision was made to delay launching the Beta draft until May 2012. With the Alpha and Beta stages already running a year or more behind 2009 targets, it’s not clear how much time can be allocated for completing the Beta phase and two year field trials period – if the target for a final version for public viewing in 2014 is going to be reached.

According to the ICD-11 Timeline, presentation for World Health Assembly approval has been shifted to May 2015 and in this paper, published in March 2012 by Christopher Chute, MD, (Chair, ICD-11 Revision Steering Group) et al, publication of ICD-11 is now expected “around 2016.”

+++
“…And just a small detail: who will do all this work?” [4]

ICD-11 is a very ambitious project.

The burden of drafting and liaison is being carried out largely via electronic means between individuals scattered across the globe and in addition to their clinical and academic responsibilities.

Given the scale of the undertaking, its technical complexity, limited funding and human resources, lack of an overall project manager, reported communication problems between WHO, Revision Steering Group, Topic Advisory Group managing editors and members and the amount of work that remains to be completed, I cannot see this vision of WHO’s Bedirhan Üstün reaching fruition by 2016.

There are some interesting comments in this Agenda Appendix (Page 6 of 10) on project funding, lack of resources, project management and lines of communication: ICD-11 April 11 Meeting Agenda

For make-up of the Revision Steering Group (RSG) and the various Topic Advisory Groups (TAGs) see links at end of post. Membership of the various sub working groups to Topic Advisory Groups and the names of external peer reviewers of proposals and content have not been published by ICD-11 Revision.

+++

Where can the Beta drafting platform be viewed?

ICD Revision Steering Group and the various Topic Advisory Groups that are developing the Beta draft are working on an electronic collaborative authoring platform, called the iCAT, on a password protected server accessible only by WHO classification experts, Revision Steering Group, Topic Advisory Group Managing Editors and revision process IT personnel and software developers. It looks similar to this:

For more views of the iCAT see Slides 20-25 and Slide 39 of this 2011 slide presentation:

ICD-11 Slide Presentation: Harrison Slides 2011 PDF 3MB

The iCAT platform is more complex than the publicly viewable version of the Beta platform and has a mechanism for recording change histories which tracks additions, deletions and revisions to the draft as ICD chapters are reorganized and new content generated and populated.

Population of content is managed by the Topic Advisory Group (TAG) Managing Editors following review by the Revision Steering Group. Structural changes to the classification, eg changing parent/child relationships and editing the linearizations can only be done by TAG Managing Editors in liaison with WHO classification experts. Source: Drafting Workflow text and chart [MS Word]; Swim Lane Workflow chart [PDF].

The publicly viewable version of the Beta drafting platform, which was launched in May 2012, looks like this:

With no change histories displaying in the public version of the Beta it is difficult for stakeholders to track proposed hierarchical changes to existing categories, changes to the names of parent classes or child categories, proposed introduction of new category terms (and the rationales for these) or proposed retirement of ICD-10 categories.

In the absence of rationales, it cannot be determined whether the disappearance of a category or group of categories is due to error or oversight by Advisory Group Managing Editors or others with editor level access, a temporary absence while a specific chapter section is being reorganized or whether these no longer displaying categories are intended to be subsumed under existing or new categories.

For example, a number of ICD-10 F45 and F48 Somatoform Disorder categories were removed from the Beta draft in early July with no explanation of intention.

Whilst ICD Revision invites interaction with the drafting process, the lack of clear intent on the part of Advisory Group editors and lack of response to requests for clarifications hinder submission of meaningful stakeholder comment and productive interaction with the process.

Caveats

When viewing the Beta draft, be mindful of the Caveats published by ICD Revision; the draft is in a state of flux.

The ICD-11 Beta drafting process is a work in progress over the next two to three years. The Beta draft is updated on a daily basis to reflect the work being carried out on the iCAT platform. Parent terms, category terms and sorting codes assigned to categories are subject to change as chapter reorganization progresses.

The Beta draft can be accessed here:

Beta draft Foundation Component (FC) view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

Beta draft Linearization Morbity (LM) view:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en

For definitions of Synonyms, Inclusions, Exclusions and ICD-11 terminology see the iCAT Glossary.

+++

Who are the stakeholders in ICD?

government service providers
policy makers and policy implementation agencies
health care professionals and practitioners
physician groups, especially primary care physicians
psychiatrists
psychologists
nurses
researchers and clinician academics
lay health care workers (who deliver most of the primary and mental health care in some developing countries)
social workers
patients (aka service users/consumers of health services), their families and carers
advocacy and disability rights organizations
health information managers and coders
health information technology workers
insurers

On its Facebook page, in June, ICD Revision put out a specific call for professionals with backgrounds in the following fields:

http://www.facebook.com/ICD11

Do you have a background in any of the following areas?

Medicine
Nursing
Midwifery
Dentistry
Pharmacy
Health information management (coding, medical records)
Environmental and occupational health and hygiene
Physiotherapy or Physical therapy
Nutrition
Social Sciences
Psychology
Social work and counseling
Epidemiology
Health Policy
Traditional and complementary medicine

WHO is asking experts from all over the world to sign up today to participate in the ICD revision.

www.who.int/classifications/icd11

+++

How can stakeholders participate in the Beta process?

The public version of the Beta platform can be viewed without registration.

Professional stakeholders and others who register an interest are able to interact with the drafting process and have access to additional content.

Interested stakeholders can register here

Registered stakeholders are permitted to:

• Add comments on and read other stakeholder comments on concepts; title terms; synonyms; inclusion terms, exclusions and other Content Model parameter terms;
• Comment on whether a category is in the right place;
• Comment on whether the category is useful for Primary Care; Research; Clinical;
• Suggest definitions (with source for definition) for a disease or disorder and comment on already populated draft definitions;
• Make proposals to change ICD categories;
• Offer to participate in field trials (for professionals);
• Offer to assist in translating ICD into other languages

Comments left by registered stakeholders are not visible to non registered viewers. Comments cannot be edited or deleted and appear immediately.

Recently issued documents around the Beta drafting process

Frequently Asked Questions About ICD-11

ICD-11 Beta: Expectations, Concerns and Known Issues: Information for Beta Participants

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/betaexpectations/en/

ICD-11 Known Concerns and Criticisms: Known concerns about the ICD-11 Beta phase

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/icd11betaknownconcerns.pdf

ICD-11 Beta known concerns

ICD-11 Known Problems and Issues: General known issues

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/icd11knownissues.pdf

ICD-11 General known issues

+++

The ICD-11 Content Model

ICD Revision says that the most important difference between ICD-10 and ICD-11 will be the Content Model.

In ICD-10, other than Chapter V Mental and behavioral disorders, there are no definitions or other descriptive content associated with ICD categories – just hierarchical lists of diseases arranged by chapter and their ICD codes.

But content in ICD-11 is being populated in accordance with the Content Model Reference Guide and there will be the potential for considerably more content to be included for diseases, disorders and syndromes in ICD-11 than appears in ICD-10, across all chapters:

“Population of the Content Model and the subsequent review process will serve as the foundation for the creation of the ICD-11. The Content Model identifies the basic characteristics needed to define any ICD category through use of multiple parameters.”

The most recently published version of the Content Model Reference Guide is here:

Content Model Reference Guide January 2011 [MS Word]

There are currently 13 defined parameters in the content model to describe a category in ICD. All categories will have an ICD Entity Title, Classification Properties, Textual Definition, Terms and up to 13 parameters described.

Content Model Parameters

ICD Entity Title
Classification Properties
Textual Definitions
Terms
Body System/Structure Description
Temporal Properties
Severity of Subtypes Properties
Manifestation Properties
Causal Properties
Functioning Properties
Specific Condition Properties
Treatment Properties
Diagnostic Criteria

Some ICD-11 chapters are more advanced than others for reorganization of categories and population of proposed definitions and text for other parameters.

In setting itself the task of generating, peer reviewing, populating and approving this amount of detail across the entire ICD, one has to question how realistic a goal this is within current timeframes.

“Populating the Content Model is a critical task for the revision. Failure results in failure of delivery of ICD‑11.” [4]

It would not surprise me if at some point before the end of this year, ICD Revision Steering Group announces further delays for the Beta drafting and field trial stages and an extension to the projected dissemination date, or a scaling back of the project if completion of ICD-11 and its several, planned speciality publications, by 2016, is to be viable.

+++

Will ICD-11 be implemented worldwide from 2015/16?

ICD-10 is used in over 100 countries, worldwide. Assuming ICD-11 does meet it schedules, it may still take several years before countries currently using ICD-10 are ready to adopt ICD-11.

Several countries have been authorized by WHO to develop their own “Clinical Modification (CM)” of ICD. Canada uses an adaptation called ICD-10-CA, with a version published for 2009. Germany uses a version called ICD-10-GM. Australia (ICD-10-AM) and Thailand (ICD-10-TM) also use country specific modifications of ICD-10.

The US lags behind the rest of the world and is still using a CM version of ICD based on the ICD-9, which is long since retired by the WHO.

Instead of moving onto ICD-11, once this is completed, the US had scheduled implementation of a clinical modification of ICD-10 called ICD-10-CM, for October 1, 2013. ICD-10-CM has been in development for a considerable number of years.

On April 17, 2012 the Secretary of HHS issued a proposed rule to delay the compliance date for ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS codes sets from October 1, 2013 to October 1, 2014, in order to allow more time for clinical practices and the coding industry to prepare for transitioning from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM.

The public comment period for the proposed rule to delay the compliance date is now closed and comments are in the process of being reviewed. A final rule has yet to be announced. Until a new compliance date has been ratified and the revised implementation date reached, codes in ICD-10-CM are not valid for any purpose or use but can be viewed for free on the CDC website together with other ICD-10-CM documentation.

The US might not anticipate moving on to a clinical modification of ICD-11 before 2020 and possibly later*.

*Source: DHSS Office of Secretary Final Rule document: “We estimated that the earliest projected date to begin rulemaking for implementation of a U.S. clinical modification of ICD–11 would be the year 2020.”

WHO-FIC meeting materials suggest no earlier than 2018 for Canada. Australia is discussing earlier adoption of ICD-11 (or a CM of ICD-11).

Harmonization between ICD-11 and DSM-5

There is already a degree of correspondence between DSM-IV categories and Chapter V of ICD-10. For the next editions, the APA and WHO have committed as far as possible:

“To facilitate the achievement of the highest possible extent of uniformity and harmonization between ICD-11 mental and behavioural disorders and DSM-V disorders and their diagnostic criteria.”

with the objective that

“The WHO and APA should make all attempts to ensure that in their core versions, the category names, glossary descriptions and criteria are identical for ICD and DSM.”

WHO acknowledges that there may be areas where congruency may not be achievable.

With the timelines for DSM-5 and ICD-11 running out of synch (DSM-5 slated for publication in May 2013; ICD-11 still at the Beta drafting stage with a two year period scheduled for completion of its field trials), this may present barriers to harmonization.

With the three systems: DSM-5 (publication date May 2013), ICD-10-CM (subject to partial code freeze since October 1, 2011 until 2014+ with new compliance date t.b.a.) and ICD-11 (dissemination scheduled for 2015+) set to become potentially more closely aligned, proposals for ICD-11 may have implications for US health care professionals and patient populations who might also consider themselves stakeholders in the ICD-11 development process.

References and additional ICD-11 related links and documentation

According to documents [1] and [2], ICD-11 was originally planned for dissemination by 2012, with the timelines for revisions of ICD-10 and DSM-IV running more or less in parallel. By 2008, the completion date for ICD-11 had been extended to 2014. In December 2009, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) announced a shift in the publication date for DSM-5 to May 2013. APA News Release No. 09-65

1] IUPsyS Mar 08 Agenda Item 25 ICD-10
International Union of Psychological Science COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS ACTION, March 28–30, 2008, Agenda Item No. 25: Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) and Involvement of Psychology

2] Exhibit 1 WHO Letter Aug 07
Letter Saxena, WHO, to Ritchie, IUPsyS (International Union for Psychological Science), August 2007
Source: http://www.apa.org/international/governance/cirp/s08agenda25-Exhibit1.pdf

3] Pages 5-6: Report, WHO FIC Council conference call, 16 February 2011, PDF format

4] Closing remarks, PowerPoint presentation: “Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform”, Stanford team, 12.04.11, WHO, Geneva.

5] Key document: ICD Revision Project Plan version 2.1 9 July 2010

Key links

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform | Publicly viewable version

WHO ICD Revision | Main WHO website: Revision Steering Group and Topic Advisory Groups
ICD-11 Revision site | Revision resources [Google site currently unavailable]
ICD-11 Revision site Documents Page | Key revision documents and meeting materials [Google site currently unavailable]

ICD-11 Revision Information |
ICD-11 Timeline |

ICD Information Sheet |

Revision News |
Steering Group |
Topic Advisory Groups |

ICD-11 YouTube Channel | Video reports
ICD-11 on Facebook |
ICD-11 on Twitter |
ICD-11 Blog | Not updated since October 2009

ICD-11 YouTubes collated on Dx Revision Watch ICD-11 YouTubes |

WHO Publications

ICD-10 Tabular List online Version: 2010 | International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision Version: 2010, Tabular List of inclusions and Chapter List

ICD-10 Volume 2: Instruction Manual | Volume 2 online Version: 2010 PDF Download

ICD-10 for Mental and Behavioural Disorders Diagnostic Criteria for Research | PDF download
ICD-10 for Mental and Behavioural Disorders Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines | PDF download

ICD-10 Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index | WHO does not make ICD-10 Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index available online

About the World Health Organization (WHO)

The WHO Family of International Classifications

History of ICD

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform for release in May 2012

Posted on February 11, 2012 by meagenda

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform for release in May 2012

Post #139 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1SE

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform

ICD Revision on Facebook has announced that a ‎4th Face to Face meeting of the ICD Revision Topic Advisory Group for Internal Medicine (TAG IM) was held recently, in Tokyo.

No agenda, meeting materials or documents have been posted on the ICD-11 Revision Google site but a PowerPoint presentation prepared by WHO’s, Dr Bedirhan Üstün, is viewable here on the “Slideshare” platform.

Dr Bedirhan Üstün is Coordinator, Classifications, Terminology and Standards, Department of Health Statistics and Information, WHO, Geneva.

You won’t need a PowerPoint .pptx format viewer to view this presentation on the Slideshare site, but you will need a .pptx viewer if you want to download and view the file. (A free .pptx viewer can be downloaded for free from the Microsoft site.)

In order to download the file, you will first need to register with Slideshare or use a Facebook membership as Sign in. If you do agree to download through a Facebook membership, please read and digest the T & C before you agree to Slideshare accessing your Facebook profile data.

View the presentation here:

http://www.slideshare.net/ustunb/tokyo-2012-ustun-show

Tokyo 2012 ustun (show) by Bedirhan Ustun on Feb 10, 2012

for which it states:

“WHO is revising the ICD to be completed by 2015. It is going to enter into a Beta phase by 2012 May during which all stakeholders could see and comment on the ICD as well as propose changes, test in practice.”

Slide #7 states:

• 2011 : Alpha version (ICD 11 alpha draft)

– + 1 YR : Commentaries and consultations

• 2012 : Beta version & Field Trials Version

– + 2 YR Field Trials

• 2014 : Final version for public viewing

– 2015 : WHA Approval

• 2015+ implementation

Slides #11 and #12, set out the thirteen parameters of the ICD-11 “Content Model”.

The “Content Model”

ICD Revision says that the most important difference between ICD-10 and ICD-11 will be the Content Model.

Content in ICD-11 will be populated in accordance with the ICD-11 Content Model Reference Guide. There is the potential for considerably more content to be included for diseases, disorders and syndromes in ICD-11 than appears in ICD-10, across all chapters:

“Population of the Content Model and the subsequent review process will serve as the foundation for the creation of the ICD-11. The Content Model identifies the basic characteristics needed to define any ICD category through use of multiple parameters (e.g. Body Systems, Body Parts, Signs and Symptoms, Diagnostic Findings, Causal Agents, Mechanisms, Temporal Patterns, Severity, Functional Impact, Treatment interventions, Diagnostic Rules).”

This is the most recent available version of the Content Model Reference Guide January 2011

This iCAT Glossary page gives an overview of the 13 Content Model parameters.

New Beta drafting browser

In May 2011, a publicly viewable ICD-11 Alpha Browser platform was launched.

In July 2011, this platform was opened up to professionals and other interested stakeholders who can register via the site for fuller access and for reading and submitting comments. See the ICD-11 Alpha Browser User Guide for information on how the Browser functions and how to register for increased access. (This is the Alpha/Beta “hybrid” referred to in the WHO-FIC Council conference call report, February 16, 2011: Page 6: PDF for Report)

ICD-11 Revision and Topic Advisory Groups are continuing to use a separate platform for drafting purposes.

Stakeholder participation at the Beta stage

In preparation for the Beta drafting stage, another publicly viewable platform is being developed. According to ICD Revision presentations, this platform will invite and support a higher level of professional and public interaction with the drafting process, with various levels of input and editing authority for interested stakeholders who register for participation. According to editing status, registered stakeholders would be permitted to:

Make comments
Make proposals to change ICD categories
Participate in field trials
Assist in translating

See presentation slides in Dx Revision Watch Posts #70 and #71:

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting 11 – 14 April 2011: The Way Forward?

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and PowerPoint slide presentations

Slides #15 and #16 of Dr Üstün’s presentation show the methods via which interested stakeholders will be able to register for interaction with the platform.

I will update when more information becomes available on the launch of the Beta platform.

CFSAC November 8-9, 2011 meeting: Minutes and Recommendations to HHS posted

Posted on January 14, 2012 by meagenda

CFSAC November 8-9, 2011 meeting: Minutes and Recommendations to HHS posted

Shortlink Post #129: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1Fn

The fall meeting of the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee (CFSAC) took place on November 8-9, 2011.

Minutes and Committee’s Recommendations to HHS have now been posted on the CFSAC website.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee (CFSAC)

The Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee (CFSAC) provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services via the Assistant Secretary for Health of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on issues related to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). These include:

• factors affecting access and care for persons with CFS;
• the science and definition of CFS; and
• broader public health, clinical, research and educational issues related to CFS.

Administrative and management support for CFSAC activities is provided by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH). However, staffing will continue to be provided primarily from the Office on Women’s Health, which is part of OASH.

Dr. Nancy C. Lee, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health – Women’s Health, is the Designated Federal Officer for CFSAC.

The Meetings page is here

Minutes Day One CFSAC Fall 2011 meeting

Minutes Day Two CFSAC Fall 2011 meeting

Presentations, Public Testimony and links for Videos for Day One and Day Two

The Agenda item with the most relevance for this site was the issue of the current proposals for chapter placement and coding for Chronic fatigue syndrome in the forthcoming US specific ICD-10-CM, the proposals presented for consideration at the September meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee on behalf of the Coalition for ME/CFS, and an alternative proposal presented by NCHS.

See this Dx Revision Watch post (Post #118, December 27, 2011) for a report on the Fall 2012 Meeting presentation by Donna Pickett (NCHS) and discussions of proposals for ICD-10-CM:

CFSAC November 2011 meeting: videos, presentations and Day One Agenda item:

International Classification of Diseases – Clinical Modification (ICD-CM): Presentation by Donna Pickett, RHIA, MPH, National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)

Recommendations out of the Fall 2011 CFSAC Meeting

CFSAC Recommendations – November 8-9, 2011

The specific recommendations articulated by the Committee are:

1. This recommendation addresses the process by which CFSAC transmits recommendations to the Secretary and the Secretary communicates back to CFSAC whether or not a recommendation was acted upon. CFSAC recommends that this process be transparent and clearly articulated to include regular feedback on the status of the committee’s recommendations. This communication could originate directly from the Office of the Secretary or be transmitted via the relevant agency or agencies.

2. CFSAC recommends to the Secretary that the NIH or other appropriate agency issue a Request for Applications (RFA) for clinical trials research on chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME).

3. CFSAC would like to encourage and support the creation of the DHHS Interagency Working Group on Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and ask this group to work together to pool resources that would put into place the “Centers of Excellence” concept that has been recommended repeatedly by this advisory committee. Specifically, CFSAC encourages utilizing HHS agency programs and demonstration projects, available through the various agencies, to develop and coordinate an effort supporting innovative platforms that facilitate evaluation and treatment, research, and public and provider education. These could take the form of appropriately staffed physical locations, or be virtual networks comprising groups of qualified individuals who interact through a variety of electronic media. Outreach and availability to underserved populations, including people who do not have access to expert care, should be a priority in this effort.

4. This multi‐part recommendation pertains to classification of CFS in ICD classification systems:

a) CFSAC considers CFS to be a multi‐system disease and rejects any proposal to classify CFS as a psychiatric condition in the U.S. disease classification systems.

b) CFSAC rejects the current classification of CFS in Chapter 18 of ICD‐9‐CM under R53.82, chronic fatigue unspecified, chronic fatigue syndrome, not otherwise specified.

c) CFSAC continues to recommend that CFS should be classified in ICD‐10‐CM in Chapter 6 under Diseases of the Nervous System at G93.3 in line with ICD‐10, the World Health Organization, and ICD‐10‐CA, the Canadian Clinical Modification and in accordance with CFSAC’s recommendations of August 2005 and May 2011. CFSAC rejects CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics Option 2 and recommends that CFS remain in the same code and the same subcode as myalgic encephalomyelitis because CFS includes both viral and non‐viral triggers.

d) CFSAC recommends that an “excludes one” [sic *] be added to G93.3 for chronic fatigue, R53.82, and neurasthenia, F48.8. CFSAC recommends that these changes be made in ICD‐10‐CM prior to its rollout in 2013.

This final recommendation was also provided to the National Center for Statistics at the CDC prior to the November 18, 2011 deadline for comments along with the following rationale:

We feel that the interests of patients, the scientific and medical communities, continuity and logic are best served by keeping CFS, (B)ME (Benign Myalgic Encephalomyelitis) and PVFS (Post Viral Fatigue Syndrome) in the same broad grouping category. Current scientific evidence would indicate there are more similarities between the three entities than there are differences. Whether they are synonyms for the same underlying concept, disease entities and sub‐entities, or merely the best coding guess is unclear. In reality, any or all of the above may be correct. While the relationship between CFS, B(ME) and PVFS is not stated, that they are grouped together in ICD 10 (WHO) would indicate some rationale for a connection. Our understanding is that this association will be maintained in the ICD 11, which may also include further description of the relationship. Exclusions specific to chronic fatigue (a symptom present in many illnesses) and neurasthenia (not a current diagnosis) also seem to be under consideration for ICD 11.

*Ed: Should be “Excludes1″. For definitions for “Excludes1″ and “Excludes2″ see Post #118

November 2011 Recommendations Letter to the Secretary (PDF 31 KB)

November 2011 CFSAC Recommendations Chart (PDF 138 KB)

The Minute for Ms Pickett’s presentation “International Classification of Diseases—Clinical Modification (ICD‐CM) Donna Pickett, National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)” and Committee discussions in response to that presentation can be found on Pages 4-10 of the PDF for Minutes Day One (November 8, 2011).

Video of presentation in Post #118. Ms Pickett’s presentation slides here in PDF format.

The Minute for the proposal and unanimous approval of a revised and expanded Recommendation to HHS on the coding of CFS in ICD-10-CM can be found on Pages 43-44 of the PDF for Minutes Day Two (November 9, 2011). Video in Post #118.

As reported in Post #118, following the September 14 meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee, NCHS had invited comments from stakeholders on the proposals in Option 1 (presented by the Coalition for ME/CFS) and Option 2 (alternative proposals by NCHS).

The closing date for comments was November 18, 2011.

A decision was expected before the end of December but since any decision that might have been reached on these proposals has yet to be announced, I have raised some queries with Ms Pickett around the decision making process (see Post #118). I will update when a response has been received from Ms Pickett’s office or a public announcement made.

International Classification of Diseases – Clinical Modification (ICD-CM): Presentation by Donna Pickett, RHIA, MPH, National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), November 27, 2011

Update on ICD-11 development: July 3, 2011

Posted on July 3, 2011 by meagenda

Update on ICD-11 development: July 3, 2011

Post #96 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-1eb

The information in this mailing relates only to ICD-11, the forthcoming revision of ICD-10 that is scheduled for pilot implementation in 2015. It does not apply to the forthcoming US specific Clinical Modification of ICD-10, known as “ICD-10-CM”, scheduled for implementation in October 2013, or to Clinical Modifications of ICD-10 already in use.

Caveat (updated 18 September 2011): The screenshots below were a “snapshot” of the ICD-11 Alpha Browser as it had stood on May 17 and 19, 2011. The ICD-11 Alpha Browser is a work in progress and is updated by ICD Revision personnel on a daily basis. Information visible in the Alpha Browser is incomplete, will have changed since May 17, may be in a state of flux and may contain errors and omissions; the codes and temporary “Sorting labels” assigned to ICD parent classes and categories are subject to change as work on the draft progresses and as chapters are reorganized. Note that the screenshots below no longer reflect what can be seen in the draft, as it currently stands in September 2011.

Not all ICD-11 category terms and the data associated with them (which is in the process of being populated according to 13 common ICD-11 Content Model fields, that include Definitions, Inclusions, Exclusions, Causal Mechanisms and other parameters that will be used to describe ICD-11 entities) display in this version of the Alpha Browser platform. A separate, more layered electronic drafting platform is being used by the various ICD Revision Topic Advisory Group (TAG) managers and their workgroup members, accessible only to ICD Revision TAG personnel via a password protected log in. The multi author electronic platform which the Revision TAGs are working on displays Content Model fields that are not currently viewable by the public, though for some ICD categories, Definitions are now displaying in the public version, as the development of some chapters of the ICD-11 Alpha Browser is more advanced than others.

In the next month or two, ICD-11 Revision is planning to release a new drafting platform which will be accessible by the public and for which professionals and the public will be able to register online to submit comment. This new platform was originally scheduled for mid May, then July, but ICD Revision is slipping its targets. When the new platform is released, there will be an official channel of communication but the commenting process will not be like that of the DSM stakeholder review. For an idea of what is being planned for stakeholder involvement during the alpha and beta development stages, see the presentation slides in these two Dx Revision Watch posts from April 19, 2011:

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting 11 – 14 April 2011: The Way Forward?

Shortlink Post #70: http://wp.me/pKrrB-ZN

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and PowerPoint slide presentations

Shortlink Post #71: http://wp.me/pKrrB-10i

In the meantime, the version of the Alpha Draft currently visible to the public comes with WHO caveats and should not be relied upon and it does not reflect the screenshots below, as they had stood in May, this year. As soon as the new public platform is released, I will update, at the moment there is insufficient information to reliably determine proposals and I am seeing misreporting and outdated information being discussed on some forums.

For example, in June to November 2010, the iCAT Alpha Draft recorded a change in hierarchy for PVFS because its parent class “G93 Other disorders of brain” is removed, with ICD Title “Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome” listed as a child category of parent class, ”GN Other disorders of the nervous system” (see this post for screenshots as they stood at that date).

But by May 2011, the “Sorting labels” had been revised and the public version of the alpha draft displayed “06L Other disorders of the nervous system” > “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome”. However, the 06L00 code has subsequently been reassigned to parent class “Disorders of autonomic nervous system”, and parent class, “[G93] Other disorders of brain” (an ICD-10 legacy parent class which had previously been proposed to be removed or retired) has since reappeared as a parent class at “06L02″.

“Chronic fatigue syndrome” is currently listed not at, or under “06L00″, or under parent class “06L02″ [formerly parent class G93, under which had sat PVFS and (B)ME and a number of other child classes to G93], but is currently assigned the Sorting label “23A113.00″ under:

23 Special tabulation lists for mortality and morbidity
> 23A Tabulation list for mortality
>> 23A113 Selected cause is Remainder of the nervous system in Condensed and selected Infant and child mortality lists
>>> 23A113.00 Chronic fatigue syndrome

(for which no rationale or “Discussion Note” is evident in the public version), together with a long list of other Chapter 6 categories listed under Special tabulation lists for mortality and morbidity.

I would advise against attempting to determine ICD-11 proposals based on the status of the information as it currently displays, the ambiguities, the lack of visible “Discussion Notes” which explain changes (which had been visible in the iCAT platform, last year) and given that input and organization of data on the multi editor platform is subject to daily revision by numerous ICD Revision personnel, is therefore in a state of flux and may contain technical errors and omissions due to software glitches and human error in data entry and operation of a complex electronic platform.

I wrote to WHO’s Sarah Cottler in September 2011 requesting clarifications. No response was received.

Click here for ICD Caveats

Screenshot from ICD11 Alpha retrieved May 17 – 11.02 UTC Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system: Foundation Tab selected

ICD11 Alpha Chapter 6

» http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_G93_3_3

Screenshot from ICD11 Alpha retrieved May 19 – 11.02 UTC Chapter 6: Linearizations Tab > Morbidity selected

» http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_G93_3_3

Slipping Timeline

In May, I reported that the revision of ICD-10 and development of ICD-11 is running about a year behind targets for the population of content and software development and that the ICD-11 Timeline for Alpha and Beta drafting has been adjusted [1]. In order to meet its revised schedule, the technical work on ICD-11 will need to be completed by 2013, the year the APA’s DSM-5 is slated for publication.

Drafting platforms

In November 2010, the iCAT platform through which ICD-11 was being drafted was taken out of the public domain. In May, this year, an ICD-11 Alpha browser was released for public viewing [2], with a number of caveats [3].

This most recently published Alpha platform does not include many of the “Content Model” parameters, for example, no draft “Definitions” are included and neither are the ”Discussion Notes” and “Change Histories” that had been viewable in the iCAT, as it stood last June to November. You can see screenshots of the June to November 2010 version of the iCAT in this post [4].

For screenshots from the most recent Alpha Browser for:

Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system > 06L Other disorders of the nervous system > 06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome

see this post [5] or pull up the Alpha Browser pages, here [6].

As you’ll see, ICD-10 Chapter VI (6) is undergoing reorganization and the parent class “G93 Other disorders of brain” under which “Postviral fatigue syndrome”, “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” and many other ICD-10 categories had sat is proposed to be removed. A change of hierarchy between “Postviral fatigue syndrome” and “Chronic fatigue sydrome” is recorded in a “Change History” note.

Reorganization of Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system

Chapter 6 categories for ICD-11 are currently assigned the codes 06A thru 06L02. It is not known what codes will eventually be assigned to the categories within ICD-11 Chapter 6. As you’ll see from the screenshots, “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome” is proposed to be classified under “06L Other disorders of the nervous system”, with “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” specified as an Inclusion term to “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome”.

Relationships between Inclusion terms are not specified within ICD-10, but they will be specified within ICD-11.

Go here for ICD-11 Chapter 5 “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders” > Somatoform Disorders and Neurasthenia:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_F45

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_F48_3_0

Go here for ICD-11 Chapter 18 “Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified” > Malaise and fatigue:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_R53

The Revision Steering Group (RSG) and the various ICD Revision Topic Advisory Groups (TAGs) and their external reviewers for content and proposals are using a more layered version of the platform on which they are undertaking the ongoing drafting process; their platform is currently accessible only to WHO, ICD Revision and IT technicians.

The public version of the ICD-11 Alpha Browser, which is being updated daily, is currently open for public viewing only – not for commenting on. But in July, ICD Revision is planning to open up the Alpha Browser for one year for public commenting and consultations.

Extracts from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/index.html

ICD-11 Timeline

Compiled from the most recent Timelines [1] [7]:

• May 2011: Alpha Browser opened up for public viewing [Reached]

• July 2011: Alpha Browser opened up for public commenting

+1 year for Commentaries and consultations

• May 2012: Beta version opened up to public and Field Trials Version

+2 years for Field trials

• 2014: Final version for public viewing

• May 2015: Presentation of the final version for World Health Assembly (WHA) Approval

Stakeholder participation

The WHO will be engaging with stakeholders who express an interest in participating in the ICD revision process.

Individuals may register to:

Make comments

Make proposals to change ICD categories

Participate in field trials

Assist in translating

The drafting browsers will be open all year round, subject to continuous daily updates and open to all interested stakeholders – Health Care Providers, Information Managers etc. Proposals and feedback will be subject to structured peer review by the Topic Advisory Groups.

For more information on how stakeholder participation is being projected see presentation slides in these reports on my site [8] [9].

Registering for participation

It’s currently unclear which classes of stakeholder might be called upon to participate, and to what extent, during the Alpha drafting stage.

The Stakeholder Registration Form [10] currently appears geared for participation by medical and allied health professionals and administrators. Irrespective of whether the “Yes” or “No” field for the question “Are you a health care professional?” is selected, one is presented with the same options:

Register to become involved

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/index.html

WHO wants to know if you are interested in being involved in the ICD Revision. We will contact you as certain features are opened to the public.

What is your clinical profession?

Medicine

Psychology

Nursing

Counselling

Social Work

Health Information Manager

Coder

Which of the following describes your highest educational attainment? Pre-University; University Degree; Non-doctoral post graduate degree (e.g. Master’s;) Doctoral degree (PhD, post bachelor’s MD, or similar)

Are you interested in participating in:

Making proposals

Peer-reviewing

Field trials

I will check the form again, once the Alpha draft has been opened up for public comment, currently scheduled for July. It is anticipated that an Alpha browser using different software from that currently in use may be released in July. I will update when the browser is opened up for public comment.

The ICD-11 “Content Model”

The WHO’s, Dr Bedhiran Üstün, describes ICD-10 as a “laundry list”. One of the most significant differences between ICD-10 and the forthcoming ICD-11 will be the “Content Model”.

Content Model

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/contentmodel/en/index.html

The content model is a structured framework that captures the knowledge that underpins the definition of an ICD entity.

• Represents ICD entities in a standard way

• Allows computerization

• Each ICD entity can be seen from different dimensions or “parameters”. E.g. there are currently 13 defined main parameters in the content model to describe a category in ICD (see below).

• A parameter is expressed using standard terminologies known as “value sets”

Content Model Parameters

ICD Entity Title

Classification Properties

Textual Definitions

Terms

Body System/Structure Description

Temporal Properties

Severity of Subtypes Properties

Manifestation Properties

Causal Properties

Functioning Properties

Specific Condition Properties

Treatment Properties

Diagnostic Criteria

For more information on the application of the “Content Model” see document [11].

Definitions

There are no definitions inlcuded in any volume of ICD-10 for ”Postviral fatigue syndrome”, “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” or “Chronic fatigue syndrome”. WHO has never set out what it understands by these terms nor has it specified what ICD-10 understands the relationships between these three terms to be (see page: http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/icd-11-me-cfs/) but there will be definitions in ICD-11 and the relationships between Inclusion terms will be specified.

Definitions

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/def/en/index.html

• All ICD entities will have definitions: key descriptions of the meaning of the category in human readable terms – to guide users

• Limited definition in Print Version – 100 words

• Detailed definitions ONLINE

• Definitions will be compatible with:

- the Content Model

- Diagnostic Criteria

- across the whole classification and the versions

Versions of ICD-11 are planned for multiple settings:

Primary Care

Clinical Services

Research

Specialty Adaptations of ICD-11 are being planned for:

Children and Youth

Oncology

Mental Health

Neurology

Musculoskeletal

Dermatology

Dentistry

————————————–

Sources, references and further reading:

ICD-11 Revision on main WHO website

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/

1] ICD-11 Revised Timeline

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/timeline/en/index.html

2] ICD-11 Alpha Browser Platform

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

3] ICD-11 Alpha Browser Caveats

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/caveat/en/index.html

4] Article: iCAT collaborative authoring platform, June to November 2010, screenshots and notes

http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/2010/06/07/pvfs-me-cfs-and-the-icd-11-alpha-draft-and-icat-collaborative-authoring-platform/

5] Article: ICD-11 Alpha Browser Platform, screenshots and notes for Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system > 06L Other disorders of the nervous system > 06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome

http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/icd-11-alpha-drafting-platform-launched-17-may-public-version/

6] ICD-11 Alpha Browser Platform: ICD-11 entity “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome”

Foundation:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_G93_3_3

Linearizations Morbidity:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_G93_3_3

7] ICD-11 Timeline: PowerPoint presentation (in PDF format)

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/class/intercop/expertgroup/2011/AC234-P32.PDF

8] Article: ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and PowerPoint slide presentations

http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/icd-revision-process-alpha-evaluation-meeting-presentations/

9] Article: ICD-11 Revision Steering Group struggling to meet targets for release of Beta Draft platform in May

http://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/04/11/icd-11-struggling-to-meet-targets-for-release-of-beta-draft-in-may/

10] Register for participation in ICD-11 Alpha drafting process

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/

Stakeholder Registration form

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDVabnF1RFpTQkVnVEN2TXhVRm55MGc6MQ

[11] ICD-11 Content Model Reference Guide version January 2011

http://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/documents

http://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/content20model20reference20guide20january2020111.doc

ICD-11 Alpha Drafting platform launched 17 May (public version)

Posted on May 19, 2011 by meagenda

ICD-11 Alpha Drafting platform launched 17 May (public version)

Post #81 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-16N

This information does not apply to the forthcoming US specific “Clinical Modification” of ICD-10, called ICD-10-CM, scheduled for implementation in October 2013.

Changes to Alpha Draft since May 17, 2011:

May 19 – 11:02 UTC : Code/sorting label assigned to Parent class “Other disorders of the nervous system” changed from 06N to 06L.

Screenshot from ICD11 Alpha May 17 – 11.02 UTC Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system: Foundation Tab selected

ICD11 Alpha Chapter 6

» http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_G93_3_3

Screenshot from ICD11 Alpha May 19 – 11.02 UTC Chapter 6: Linearizations Tab > Morbidity selected

» http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_G93_3_3

Four new pages were published on the WHO’s main website on 17 May – the revised Timeline for ICD-11, the announcement of an Alpha Draft browser, a Registration form and a Caveat. Yesterday, I posted the revised ICD-11 Revision Timeline.

What can be seen for PVFS, (B)ME and CFS in the public Alpha Draft?

For the Alpha browser, go to this page:

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/index.html

Here it states:

The International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision is due by 2015

ICD is the international standard to measure health & health services

• Mortality statistics
• Morbidity statistics
• Health care costs
• Progress towards the Millenium Development Goals
• Research

– Alpha draft is updated daily as the work progresses
– It is intended to show the new features to stakeholders early
– Commenting will be available in July 2011

The link for the alpha browser is:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en

This is the link to a page for “Caveats”

“Read more on what to expect in the ICD-11 Alpha Draft”

ICD-11 Alpha Draft Caveats

ICD-11 alpha draft is:

• Incomplete
• May contain errors, omissions or imperfections
• The work in different chapters are at different stages
• The alpha drafting work is going on by the WHO, Revision Steering Group and Topic Advisory Groups
• The alpha draft is going to be updated on a daily basis
• The alpha draft is NOT TO BE USED for CODING at this stage
• The alpha draft has not yet been approved by the Topic Advisory Groups, Revision Steering Group or WHO

Click here to access the public Alpha Draft browser

Poke around and open the Parent and Child categories and the Tabs – you cannot edit or break anything.

This new interface is not as detailed or as easy to navigate as the software version of the iCAT collaborative drafting platform that was in the public domain up until November, last year. Less information is visible, for example, some of the paramenter tabs, including “Definitions”. (Compare with what could be seen in this iCAT screenshot from last June.)

This is a public draft and another platform is being used by ICD Revision for ongoing drafting. The public draft will be updated as the work of the various Topic Advisory Groups and working groups progresses. ICD Revision has not reached its targets for the generation of content and population of “Content Model” fields across all chapters and this draft is not as far forward as ICD Revision had projected for a May 2011 release.

Though viewable now, the Alpha drafting browser is not planned to be open for public comment until July, this year. It’s not yet clear which classes of public stakeholder will be able to participate in the drafting process, come July, or to what extent.

If you are interested in the proposed public comment, interaction and input processes for the Alpha and Beta drafting stages, see this DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch post for meeting presentation slides.

Summary

First a caveat: It had been anticipated that a Beta drafting platform would be released in May, this year. WHO has cited lack of content and underdeveloped software for delaying the launch of a Beta drafting platform.

This public version of an Alpha drafting platform is a “work in progress”; not all disease and disorder categories may have been entered into the draft and proposed textual content is in the process of being authored and reviewed by the various Topic Advisory Groups, ICD Revision Steering Group and external peer reviewers.

From what can be seen, today, 19 May:

06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome

is proposed to be coded within Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system (the Neurology chapter), as an ICD Title category, under the Parent class, 06L Other disorders of the nervous system.

Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis is specified as an Inclusion to 06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome.

“Causal mechanisms” for 06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome are cited as “Virus (organism)”.

The relationship between ICD Title category 06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome and Inclusion term Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis is not yet specified, ie whether for ICD-11, “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” is proposed to be specified as a Synonym , Subclass or other relationship to “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome”.

Many categories within the draft are waiting for their Inclusion terms to be specified, not just the three terms of interest to us.

For explanation of Inclusions and other “Content Model” parameter terms, see: iCAT Glossary or the key ICD-11 Content Model document.

6 Inclusions

Details: Inclusion terms appear in the tabular list [Ed: ICD Volume 1] of the traditional print version and show users that entities are included in the relevant concept. All of the ICD-10 inclusion terms have been imported and accessible in the iCat. These are either synonyms of the category titles or subclasses which are not represented in the classification hierarchy. Since we have synonyms as a separate entity in our ICD-11 content model, the new synonyms suggested by the users should go into the synonyms section. In the future, iCat will provide a mechanism to identify whether an inclusion is a synonym or a subclass.”

What is the proposed relationship between PVFS and CFS?

Postviral fatigue syndrome is not accounted for in the “Foundations” or “Linearizations > Morbidity” listings.

In ICD-10, Postviral fatigue syndrome is an ICD Title category under G93 Other disorders of brain. I cannot confirm, but it may be that due to the hierarchy change, “Postviral fatigue syndrome” is proposed to be subsumed under “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome” with “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome” becoming the ICD Title category, because “G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome” has lost its ICD-10 Parent category.

At the moment, there is not sufficient information displaying to determine what the intention is. Last June, I requested a clarification from Dr Raad Shakir, chair of Topic Advisory Group for Neurology, but no clarification has been forthcoming.

In the iCAT initial drafting platform, last November, where “Postviral fatigue syndrome” was referenced within a “Category Note” and specified as an Exclusion to Chapter 5 and Chapter 18, it was referenced as:

“G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome -> Gj92 Chronic fatigue syndrome”

["Note: Gj92" is a "Sorting label" assigned for the initial Alpha drafting process, not an eventual ICD-11 code.]

“Change history” note from May 2010

In ICD-10, “Postviral fatigue syndrome” is a Title code at G93.3 under Parent category “G93 Other disorders of brain”. “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” sits under “G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome” (relationship unspecified).

As previously reported, an iCAT “Change history” note, dated 1 May 2010, records a “Change in hierarchy for class: G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome because its parent category (G93 Other disorders of brain) is removed.”

This would leaves the existing ICD-10 G93.3 Title category, “Postviral fatigue syndrome” and “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” that sits beneath it, and also the G93.3 index entry for Chronic fatigue syndrome with no parent category.

Note that the removal of the parent “G93 Other disorders of brain” affects many other categories also classified under G93 in ICD-10 which have also been assigned new parents under the reorganization of Chapter 6 (VI).

Screenshot of “Change history” Note from May 2010

Exclusions

No Exclusions have been specified yet for “06L00 Chronic fatigue syndrome”.

“Postviral fatigue syndrome” is specified as an Exclusion to the following ICD-11 chapters:

Chapter 5 “05E06 Other neurotic disorders > 05E06.00 Neurasthenia”
Chapter 18 “18GF General symptoms and signs > 18F03 Malaise and fatigue.”

(Chapter 18 is the “R code” chapter of ICD-10; ICD-10-CM proposes to retain CFS under R53 Malaise and fatigue at R53.82 Chronic fatigue, unspecified, as ”Chronic fatigue syndrome NOS”, with the Exclusion: Postviral fatigue syndrome G93.3.)

Go here for ICD-11 Chapter 5 “Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders” > Somatoform Disorders:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_F40-F48

Go here for ICD-11 Chapter 18 “Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified”:

http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/@_@who_3_int_1_icd_2_XVIII

Congruency with DSM-5 proposals for revision of DSM-IV “Somatoform Disorders”

There is no obvious mirroring of the radical proposals currently being put forward by the DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorders Work Group to rename “Somatoform Disorders” to “Somatic Symptom Disorders” and combine a number of existing somatoform categories under a new rubric, “Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder”.

Registering for involvement

There is a Registration form here

This form appears to be aimed at recruiting medical health professionals for putting their names down to be contacted at some point to “Make comments; Make proposals to change ICD categories; Participate in field trials; Assist in translating“. It’s not clear whether or at what point in the Alpha/Beta drafting processes involvement might be extended to non professional stakeholders.

Register to become involved

ICD-11 Registration

“WHO wants to know if you are interested in being involved in the ICD Revision. We will contact you as certain features are opened to the public.”

[Fields are: Family name*; First name*; Email address*; Organization or Company*; LinkedIn ID; Are you a health care professional?* Yes/No. Continue...] *Required fields

Related information

1] ICD11 Alpha browser

2] ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and PowerPoint slide presentations

3] Key document: ICD Revision Project Plan version 2.1 9 July 2010

4] Key document: Content Model Reference Guide version January 2011

ICD Revision: WHO announces revised Timeline for ICD-11

Posted on May 18, 2011 by meagenda

ICD Revision: WHO announces revised Timeline for ICD-11

Post #79 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-16e

The information in this report relates only to ICD-11, the forthcoming revision of ICD-10 that is scheduled for completion and pilot implementation in 2014/15. It does not apply to the forthcoming US specific Clinical Modification of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

The following has been published on the WHO’s website in the last couple of days. Note that the original timeline had scheduled presentation to the WHA (World Health Assembly) in May 2014, for pilot implementation of ICD-11 in 2014. This most recent timeline for ICD-11 Revision suggests that implementation is being postponed until 2015+.

A WHO news release (if issued) and details on how to access the drafting platform, will be posted as more information becomes available.

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/timeline/en/

ICD Revision Timelines

May 2011

Open ICD-11 Alpha Browser to the public for viewing

July 2011

Open ICD-11 Alpha Browser to the public for commenting

May 2012

Open ICD-11 Beta to the public

ICD-11 Beta Information
WHO will engage with individuals from an outside community to participate in the ICD revision process.

Individuals will be allowed to:

• Make comments
• Make proposals to change ICD categories
• Participate in field trials
• Assist in translating

May 2015
Present the ICD-11 to the World Health Assembly

Related information:

Alpha and Beta drafting process:

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and PowerPoint slide presentations, April 19, 2011: http://wp.me/pKrrB-10i

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting 11 – 14 April 2011: The Way Forward? April 19: 2011: http://wp.me/pKrrB-ZN

Key documents and references:

1] Key document: ICD Revision Project Plan version 2.1 9 July 2010

2] Key document: Content Model Reference Guide version January 2011

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting presentations

Posted on April 19, 2011 by meagenda

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and PowerPoint slide presentations

Post #71 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-10i

The information in this mailing relates only to ICD-11, the forthcoming revision of ICD-10 that is scheduled for completion and pilot implementation in 2014/15. It does not apply to the forthcoming US specific Clinical Modification of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting

An ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting was held, last week, in Geneva. See this post on DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch site for more information and commentary: http://wp.me/pKrrB-ZN

The Agenda for the meeting can be read here: ICD11 April 2011 Meeting Agenda Word .docx

Following this meeting, it is anticipated that ICD Revision Steering Group may make a public announcement within the next few weeks of how it intends to proceed in light of the fact that the timeline for transition from the Alpha to Beta drafting phases has slipped.

The meeting Agenda and PowerPoint slides suggest that ICD Revision is working towards making a version of the drafting platform publicly available around 16 May, this year, but that this may be a compromise on previous plans and possibly a “hybrid” between the Alpha and Beta drafting phases.

Earlier timelines had approval by World Health Assembly (WHA) slated for May 2014, with pilot implementation of ICD-11 in March 2014. One presentation slide now suggests approval by WHA in 2015.

It’s unconfirmed, but if this is the case, WHO may have already decided to shift WHA endorsement and dissemination of ICD-11 by 12 months, to 2015. This would mean that DSM-5 would have been put to bed and published two years prior to ICD-11 implementation.

From the meeting Agenda:

“Future Phases:

a. iCAT continued alpha development and evaluation ( 2010-11)

b. iCAT beta phase ( 2012-2015)

c. iCAT continuous maintenance phase ( 2015+)”

In November, last year, the iCAT collaborative authoring platform through which ICD-11 is being drafted was taken out of the public domain. A revised version of the software on which the platform runs is currently sitting on a Standford server, behind a password, accessible only to ICD Revision. This, or a similar version, may be made publicly accessible (or accessible to those who register for access) from mid May.

There has been discussion is earlier ICD Revision documents of a hierarchy of stakeholder input – but there is nothing much on this in the meeting presentations, for which ICD Revision has published only slides - not transcripts.

Coming up on DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch:

ICD-11 proposals for PVFS, ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome

Until some form of Alpha/Beta transition drafting platform is back in the public domain, it won’t be evident how much further forward the population of content for Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system has progressed since last November. As more information becomes available, I will update, and I will be posting a summary of how things stood in the iCAT last November, in Post #72.

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting presentations

There are five presentations published for this meeting: the following three may be of interest to those following the development of ICD-11:

(The 2007 MS PowerPoint viewer is required to view PowerPoint presentations which have been created in .pptx format. A MS .pptx viewer can be downloaded for free from the Microsoft site.)

Open full PowerPoint Presentation:”The Way Forward Questions Options” [.ppt]: TheWayForwardPP

Selected slides from “The Way Forward Questions Options”

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 12

Slide 17

Open full PowerPoint Presentation:”The Way Forward Questions Options” [.pptx]: TheWayForwardPP

——————

Open full PowerPoint Presentation: “Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform, Stanford team” [.ppt]: iCATBetaStanford[1]

Selected slides from ”Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform, Stanford team”

Slide 5

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 51

Open full PowerPoint Presentation: “Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform, Stanford team” [.ppt]: iCATBetaStanford[1]

——————

Open full Can Celik PowerPoint Presentation: “Public Tooling” [.pptx]: Ppt0000069 CanCelic

Selected slides from Can Celik’s PowerPoint Presentation: “Public Tooling”

Slide 4

Slide 7

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Open full Can Celik PowerPoint Presentation: “Public Tooling” [.pptx]: Ppt0000069 CanCelic

Key documents and references:

1] ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting Agenda and background documents

2] Report, WHO FIC Council conference call, 16 February 2011, PDF format

3] Key document: ICD Revision Project Plan version 2.1 9 July 2010

4] Key document: Content Model Reference Guide version January 2011

5] PVFS, ME, CFS: the ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT Collaborative Authoring Platform (DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch report with screenshots from the iCAT): http://wp.me/pKrrB-KK

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting 11-14 April: The Way Forward?

Posted on April 19, 2011 by meagenda

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting 11 – 14 April 2011: The Way Forward?

Post #70 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-ZN

The information in this mailing relates only to ICD-11, the revision of ICD-10 scheduled for completion and pilot implementation in 2014/15. It does not apply to the forthcoming US specific “Clinical Modification” of ICD-10, known as ICD-10-CM.

The Way Forward?

ICD-11 Revision maintains a website on a Google platform where key documents, agendas for iCAMP and workgroup meetings, background documents and presentations can be viewed and downloaded. Minutes or summaries of meetings aren’t usually posted publicly:

ICD-11 Revision: http://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home

An ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting was held in Geneva, last week, between 11-14 April, for discussing the status of the revision of ICD-10 and development of ICD-11, for both content and software development, and reviewing the ICD revision “Roadmap” and Timeline.

A copy of the Meeting Agenda can be downloaded from the ICD-11 Revision site here or opened on DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch site here: ICD11 April 11 Meeting Agenda. There are some interesting comments in the Agenda Appendix on project funding, lack of resources, project management and lines of communication.

There are five PowerPoint presentations available to download from this page.

If you are interested in the ICD Revision process, in general, then I suggest visiting the site and viewing or downloading the following three presentations – these are slides only, with no notes or transcripts.

(The 2007 MS PowerPoint viewer is required to view presentations that have been created in .pptx format. A .pptx viewer can be downloaded free from the Microsoft site.)

.ppt file: The Way Forward

.pptx file: Can Celik’s Presentation: Public Tooling

.pptx file: Stanford’s Presentation: iCAT Beta

These three presentations can also be opened in the next post on DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch site and selected slides have been posted here:

Post #71: ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and presentations

“Community engagement”

In mid 2009, ICD Revision launched a number of platforms as channels of communication with the public and maintains a YouTube Channel, Facebook site, Twitter and blog. The ICD-11 blog has not been updated since October 2009 and queries left on the Facebook site by members of the public may take several months before a response is provided or may receive no response, at all.

The YouTube videos made to accompany various Geneva meetings can also be accessed on the ICD Revision YouTube page of my site. The two most recent videos give an overview of the iCAT drafting process and the extent of the ICD-11 “Content Model” – the 13 parameters through which ICD-11 categories can be described.

Visibility of iCAT drafting platforms

Following last week’s ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting, it is anticipated that ICD Revision may make a public announcement, within the next few weeks, clarifying how it intends to proceed in light of the fact that the timeline for the Beta drafting phase is slipping.

The meeting Agenda and PowerPoint slides suggest that ICD Revision is working towards making a version of the drafting platform publicly available around 16 May, this year, but that this may represent a compromise on previous plans and may be a “hybrid” between the Alpha and Beta drafting phases.

From the Agenda:

“Future Phases:

a. iCAT continued alpha development and evaluation ( 2010-11)

b. iCAT beta phase ( 2012-2015)

c. iCAT continuous maintenance phase ( 2015+)”

Earlier timelines had projected endorsement by the World Health Assembly (WHA) and pilot implementation of ICD-11 in the spring of 2014. But one presentation slide suggests approval by WHA in 2015.

It’s unconfirmed, but if the “Milestones” timeline has been revised to accommodate a later release of a Beta drafting phase platform and later publication of a Beta Draft, then WHO may have already decided to shift the pilot implementation date for ICD-11 by 12 months, to 2015.

That would mean that by the time ICD-11 is ready for dissemination, the American Psychiatric Association’s DSM-5 would have already been put to bed and out in print two years prior to ICD-11 implementation.

It is intended that for ICD-11, all three volumes will be electronically published and capable of continuous updating in response to scientific developments (unlike ICD-10 where there are annual updates); there will also be electronic translations and print editions. The three volumes of ICD-11 are intended to be integrable with each other and also with some other classification systems.

The drafting platforms are based on Web 2.0 applications and it is proposed that there will be stakeholder and end user participation in the Beta drafting phase.

The IT work and software development for the various alpha and beta drafting platforms and final product platforms is enormously complex; there is also the potential for far more textual content in ICD-11 than there was in ICD-10 and overall, this revision project represents a huge undertaking by an under-resourced organization.

The ICD-11 Alpha/Beta drafting process

Topic Advisory Group (TAG) Managing Editors overseeing the revision of the various chapters of ICD-10 have responsibility for recruiting external experts, via networking. The function of the external experts is to peer review proposals being made by TAG members or submitted by external professional bodies and institutions and to review or assist with the generation of textual content.

[In late 2009, I approached the WHO's Dr Robert Jakob to enquire whether and at what stage the names of external peer reviewers would be identified in the drafting platforms, as visible to the public. I also asked whether the reviewing of proposals as they progressed through the Workflow review system would be a transparent process that could be monitored by the public. Neither query produced a response from Dr Jakob.]

So there are many lines of communication to be maintained between WHO classification experts, IT consultants and technicians, Revision Steering Group members, TAG Managing Editors, TAG members and external experts. There is an ICD-11 Collaborative Authoring Workflow chart here: workflow-2.

At the Beta drafting stage, the proposal is that TAG Managing Editors will continue to recruit external peer reviewers to assist workgoups with reviewing of categories, proposals and generation of content, but that versions of the Beta drafting platform would be opened up to the public for viewing, and interested stakeholders would be able to register for limited input and interaction.

Stakeholders (or preferably, communities of stakeholders) would not have editing rights, per se, but the proposal is that they would comment on proposals, “score” proposals and make evidence-based suggestions which the TAG groups would then consider for approval, which would then be incorporated into the draft or rejected. There has also been discussion of a “hierarchy” of levels of input according to professional status of stakeholders. How ICD Revision plans to verify the credentials of professionals isn’t clear, nor is it defined what would consitute a stakeholder “community”.

No static Beta Draft for public review and comment

Rather than release a static Beta draft for professional and public scrutiny in a feedback exercise for a pre-determined review period (as DSM-5 has already done and is scheduled to do again in August-September), the proposal appears to be for longer term feedback during an alpha/beta transition drafting phase on dynamic content that would be continuously updated, for example, on a four weekly cycle, to reflect the progress being made by the various Topic Advisory Groups in entering proposals for changes and populatation of textual content, and in response to external input.

So managing editors and members of the Topic Advisory Groups (mostly international clinicians and researchers juggling this work on top of their “day jobs”) are faced with maintaining lines of communication, largely via electronic means, between workgroup chairs, fellow workgroup members, external peer reviewers and WHO classification experts whilst also considering input from professional bodies, and working in the background on the drafting platform, while stakeholders are commenting and feeding suggestions into the process via the public versions of the drafting platforms.

[Some organizations and professional bodies have been compiling and submitting proposals via an ICD Revision Proposal Form, since late 2009. There is no publicly available list of which institutions and bodies have been invited to submit proposals, which have responded, or where their submissions for changes to ICD-10 can be scrutinised, but copies of these submissions occasionally turn up online, having been published in the organs of these organizations.]

Selected slides from ”Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform, Stanford team”:

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 45

Slide 46

“…who will do all this work?”

Presentations and video clips of the WHO’s Dr. Bedirhan Üstün suggest a man buzzed up on information and internet technology: “cloud sourcing”, portals, public commenting and “scoring” of proposals, wikis, blogs, internal and public “user communities”, drawing in the involvement of “Wikipedians” and other existing “editing communities” (one questions whether Dr Üstün has any experience of how Wikipedia functions and the problems inherent with some Wikipedia admins and editors, particularly in relation to editing of controversial scientific and medical areas), message boards, Facebook integration, “community engagement”…

But as the closing slide of one of last week’s presentations ruefully comments, “And just a small detail: who will do all this work?” [6]

ICD Revision and its IT and informatics advisors seem eager to use these internet applications because they exist, without having given due consideration to whether the WHO can fund, manage and sustain this level of public participation and interaction or whether this is the best way to approach the revision of the ICD.

How does ICD Revision intend to finance and recruit the personnel needed to manage the opening up of the drafting process to multiple platforms for stakeholder participation, given WHO’s limited resources when already, no-one can evidently be spared to even keep the ICD-11 blog updated or to respond to queries that members of the public have posted on ICD Revision’s existing public platforms and where Topic Advisory Group Chairs approached for brief clarifications are not always providing a response nine months down the line?

Who is going to pull this most ambitious project back down to earth?

Insufficient funding allocated and no Project Manager

From the Appendix to the April meeting Agenda:

“TAGs were supposed to be self-financed. The TAG chair was supposed to have funding to carry out their revision work.”

“As this is a core WHO activity, we should have regular budget funds for this project. The scale of this project is too big not to have funding for a project manager.”

“Additionally, ALL relevant WHO departments should have designated some financial and some human resources to this project as part of the collaborative effort.”

“…communication between the TAGs is growing, and it is beginning to become overwhelming in addition to clinical responsibilities.”

ICD-11 proposals for PVFS, ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome

Until some form of Alpha/Beta transition drafting platform is back in the public domain, it won’t be evident how much further forward the population of content for Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system has progressed since last November. As more information becomes available, I will update, and I will be posting a summary of how things stood in the iCAT last November in Post #72.

The meeting Agenda, selected slides and three of the PowerPoint presentations can be viewed/opened from Post #71, on DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch site, here:

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting documents and presentations

Key documents and related posts:

1] ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting Agenda and background documents

2] Report, WHO FIC Council conference call, 16 February 2011, PDF format

3] Key document: ICD Revision Project Plan version 2.1 9 July 2010

4] Key document: Content Model Reference Guide version January 2011

5] PVFS, ME, CFS: the ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT Collaborative Authoring Platform (DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch report with screenshots from the iCAT): http://wp.me/pKrrB-KK

6] Closing remarks, PowerPoint presentation: “Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform”, Stanford team, 12.04.11, WHO, Geneva.

Share this:

Like this:

Key ICD-11 links and documents

Share this:

Like this:

When will ICD-11 be ready for dissemination?

Who are the stakeholders in ICD?

How can stakeholders participate in the Beta process?

Recently issued documents around the Beta drafting process

The ICD-11 Content Model

Will ICD-11 be implemented worldwide from 2015/16?

References and additional ICD-11 related links and documentation

Share this:

Like this:

– 2015 : WHA Approval

Share this:

Like this:

Recommendations out of the Fall 2011 CFSAC Meeting

Share this:

Like this:

Click here for ICD Caveats

Slipping Timeline

Drafting platforms

Reorganization of Chapter 6 Diseases of the nervous system

ICD-11 Timeline

Stakeholder participation

Registering for participation

The ICD-11 “Content Model”

Definitions

Share this:

Like this:

What can be seen for PVFS, (B)ME and CFS in the public Alpha Draft?

Summary

“Change history” note from May 2010

Congruency with DSM-5 proposals for revision of DSM-IV “Somatoform Disorders”

Registering for involvement

Share this:

Like this:

ICD Revision Timelines

Related information:

Share this:

Like this:

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting

ICD-11 proposals for PVFS, ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome

ICD Revision Process Alpha Evaluation Meeting presentations

Share this:

Like this:

The Way Forward?

“Community engagement”

Visibility of iCAT drafting platforms

The ICD-11 Alpha/Beta drafting process

Selected slides from ”Proposal for the ICD Beta Platform, Stanford team”:

“…who will do all this work?”

ICD-11 proposals for PVFS, ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome

Share this:

Like this:

Follow “dx revision watch”