Coding agricultural injury: Factors affecting coder agreement |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Florida, 1741 Museum Road, PO Box 110570, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA;2. National Farm Medicine Center, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute 1000 N. Oak Ave., Marshfield, WI 54449, USA;3. Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA;1. Spectrum Health/Michigan State University General Surgery Residency, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;2. Spectrum Health/Michigan State University Plastic Surgery Residency, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;3. Department of Surgery, Michigan State University, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;4. Trauma Research Institute, Division of Acute Care Surgery, Spectrum Health Hospital, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;5. Division of Surgical Oncology, Spectrum Health Hospital, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;6. Division of Acute Care Surgery, Spectrum Health Hospital, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;7. Trauma Research Institute, Division of Acute Care Surgery, Spectrum Health Hospital, Grand Rapids, MI, United States;1. Civil and Environmental Engineering, California Polytechnic State University, United States;2. South Carolina Department of Transportation, Columbia, SC, United States;3. Wyoming Technology Transfer Center, Department of Civil & Architectural Engineering, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Avenue, Dept. 3295 Laramie, WY 82071, United States;1. Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Population Health, Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, United States;2. National Farm Medicine Center, Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, United States;3. Division of Research, Essentia Institute of Rural Health, United States;4. Department of Medicine and Public Health, University of Washington and Veterans Administration Puget Sound Health Care System, United States;1. Adolescent Risk Research Unit (ARRU), Sunshine Coast Mind and Neuroscience – Thompson Institute, University of the Sunshine Coast (USC), Australia;2. School of Social Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast (USC), Australia;3. Consortium of Adolescent Road Safety (cadrosa.org), Australia;4. Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q), Australia;1. Health Promotion and Education, School of Human Services, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, United States;2. Center for Prevention Science, Cincinnati, OH 45221, United States |
| |
| Abstract: | Objectives: To determine coders’ agreement level for the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) source of injury and injury event codes, and the Farm and Agricultural Injury Classification (FAIC) code in the AgInjuryNews.org and to determine the effects of supplemental information and follow-up discussion in final code assignments. Methods: Two independent researchers initially coded 1304 injury cases from AgInjurynews.org using the OIICS and the FAIC coding schemes. Code agreement levels for injury source, event, and FAIC and the effect of supplemental information and follow-up discussions on final coding was assessed. Results: Coders’ agreement levels were almost perfect for OIICS source and event categories at the 3-digit level, with lower agreement at the 4-digit level. By using supplemental information and follow-up discussion, coders improved the coding accuracy by an average 20% for FAIC. Supplemental information and follow-up discussions had helped finalize the disagreed codes 55% of the time for OIICS source coding assignments and 40% of time for OIICS event coding assignments for most detailed 4-digit levels. Five key themes emerged regarding accurate and consistent coding of the agricultural injuries: inclusion/exclusion based on industry classification system; inconsistent/discrepant reports; incomplete/nonspecific reports; effects of supplemental information on coding; and differing interpretations of code selection rules. Practical applications: Quantifying the level of agreement for agricultural injuries will lead to a better understanding of coding discrepancies and may uncover areas for improvement to coding scheme itself. High level of initial and final agreement with FAIC and OIICS codes suggest that these coding schemes are user-friendly and amenable to widespread use. |
| |
| Keywords: | Injury Coder agreement Injury source FAIC Kappa statistics |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
