RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Correctness of voluntary LOINC mapping for laboratory tests in three large institutions
Lin, M.-C., Vreeman, D. J., McDonald, C. J., & Huff, S. M. (2010). Correctness of voluntary LOINC mapping for laboratory tests in three large institutions. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings, 447-451. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21347018
With IRB approval, we obtained de-identified laboratory test data from 3 large institutions (ARUP, Intermountain, and Regenstrief). In this study we evaluated correctness of mapping local laboratory result codes to Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC®). We received 9,027 laboratory tests mapped to 3,669 unique LOINC codes. A one tenth sample (884 tests) was manually reviewed for correctness of the mappings. After review, there were 4 tests mapped to totally unrelated LOINC codes and there were 36 tests containing at least one error in mapping to the 6 axes of LOINC. The errors of LOINC mapping could be categorized into 4 systematic errors: 1) human errors, 2) mapping to different granularity, 3) lack of knowledge of the meaning of laboratory tests and 4) lack of knowledge of LOINC naming rules. Finally, we discuss how these systematic mapping errors might be avoided in the future.
RTI shares its evidence-based research - through peer-reviewed publications and media - to ensure that it is accessible for others to build on, in line with our mission and scientific standards.