Cited by 19Machine Learning in HealthcareMedical Coding and Health InformationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DeepDRG: Performance of Artificial Intelligence Model for Real-Time Prediction of Diagnosis-Related Groups

Open access

Abstract

Nowadays, the use of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) has been increased to claim reimbursement for inpatient care. The overall benefits of using DRGs depend upon the accuracy of clinical coding to obtain reasonable reimbursement. However, the selection of appropriate codes is always challenging and requires professional expertise. The rate of incorrect DRGs is always high due to the heavy workload, poor quality of documentation, and lack of computer assistance. We therefore developed deep learning (DL) models to predict the primary diagnosis for appropriate reimbursement and improving hospital performance. A dataset consisting of 81,486 patients with 128,105 episodes was used for model training and testing. Patients’ age, sex, drugs, diseases, laboratory tests, procedures, and operation history were used as inputs to our multiclass prediction model. Gated recurrent unit (GRU) and artificial neural network (ANN) models were developed to predict 200 primary diagnoses. The performance of the DL models was measured by the area under the receiver operating curve, precision, recall, and F1 score. Of the two DL models, the GRU method, had the best performance in predicting the primary diagnosis (AUC: 0.99, precision: 83.2%, and recall: 66.0%). However, the performance of ANN model for DRGs prediction achieved AUC of 0.99 with a precision of 0.82 and recall of 0.57. The findings of our study show that DL algorithms, especially GRU, can be used to develop DRGs prediction models for identifying primary diagnosis accurately. DeepDRGs would help to claim appropriate financial incentives, enable proper utilization of medical resources, and improve hospital performance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/healthcare9121632

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Chung, J., Gulcehre, C., Cho, K., and Bengio, Y. (2014). Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modeling. arXiv.
  2. Zafirah, 2017, Incidence of clinical coding errors and implications on casemix reimbursement in a teaching hospital in Malaysia, Malays. J. Public Health Med., 17, 19
  3. Pongpirul, 2013, Hospital manipulations in the DRG system: A systematic scoping review, Asian Biomed., 7, 301

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Islam, M. M., Li, G.-H., Poly, T. N., & Li, Y.-C. (.
Affiliations
  • Taipei Medical University (TW)
  • AESOP Technology, Songshan District, Taipei 105, Taiwan
  • Wan Fang Hospital (TW)
Corresponding author
Li, Yu-Chuan (Jack)
Venue
Healthcare
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-11-25
Volume
9
Issue
12
Pages
1632
ISSN
2227-9032 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3217307465
Cited by
19
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Healthcare (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
diagnosis-related groups, medical coding, inpatient reimbursement, gated recurrent unit, artificial neural networks, deep learning, hospital performance, medical resource utilization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review