Automated coding systems

Automated coding systems hold the potential for was conducted to acquire a better understanding of increased coding speed and accuracy compared to the accuracy of an automated coding system, unaided human coders. One automated system, LifeCode, as compared to experienced human coders. LifeCode®, uses Natural Language Processing (NLP)techniques to provide both syntactic and semantic Methodology understanding to the complex job of autocoding [1]. LifeCode processes the transcribed text of emergency A study was designed to test LifeCode against both medicine records to assign procedure codes (Current production coders and expert consultants in Procedural Terminology or CPTC codes - including emergency medicine coding. In order avoid bias from Evaluation and Management or E&M codes) and the study sponsors (A-Life Medical, Inc. which diagnosis codes (International Classification of markets LifeCode) and also to keep the human coders Diseases, version 9, or ICD-9 codes).

Automated coding systems send computer-generated codes directly to billing with little or any human intervention. While a completely automated coding process may be part of our future, the technology used today relies on the expertise of a qualified clinical coder. Thousands of records can be coded in minutes instead of time-consuming, one-at-a-time manual systems. Automated coding systems learn as they code, helping you eliminate trivial words, common misspellings, and standardize abbreviations.

Completely automated approaches are faster than human coders, but are they as accurate? According to a study conducted to access the accuracy of LifeCode in emergency department coding, the final conclusion made was LifeCode is as accurate as the human coders used in that study and offers the potential for increased coding consistency and productivity.