Validation of Neurologic Impairment Diagnosis Codes as Signifying Documented Functional Impairment in Hospitalized Children
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 26, 2025

Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools
Published on: June 20, 2020
Katherine E Nelson1, Vishakha Chakravarti2, Catherine Diskin3
1Pediatric Advanced Care Team, Hospital for Sick Children (KE Nelson, V Chakravarti, and K Widger), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Paediatric Medicine, Department of Paediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children (KE Nelson, C Diskin, E Cohen, and S Mahant), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Child Health Evaluative Sciences, SickKids Research Institute (KE Nelson, V Chakravarti, E Cohen, S Mahant, and E Pullenayegum), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (KE Nelson, E Cohen, and S Mahant), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto (KE Nelson, E Cohen, S Mahant, and E Pullenayegum), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Objective:
To assess the performance of previously published high-intensity neurologic impairment (NI) diagnosis codes in identification of hospitalized children with clinical NI.
Methods:
Retrospective study of 500 randomly selected discharges in 2019 from a freestanding children's hospital. All charts were reviewed for 1) NI discharge diagnosis codes and 2) documentation of clinical NI (a neurologic diagnosis and indication of functional impairment like medical technology). Test statistics of clinical NI were calculated for discharges with and without an NI diagnosis code. A sensitivity analysis varied the threshold for "substantial functional impairment." Secondary analyses evaluated misclassified discharges and a more stringent definition for NI.
Results:
Diagnosis codes identified clinically documented NI with 88.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.7, 91) specificity, and 79.4% (95% CI: 67.3, 88.5) sensitivity; negative predictive value (NPV) was 96.7% (95% CI: 94.8, 98.0), and positive predictive value (PPV) was 49% (95% CI: 42, 56.1). Including children with milder functional impairment (lower threshold) resulted in NPV of 95.7% and PPV of 77.5%. Restricting to children with more severe functional impairment (higher threshold) resulted in NPV of 98.2% and PPV of 44.1%. Misclassification was primarily due to inclusion of children without functional impairments. A more stringent NI definition including diagnosis codes for NI and feeding tubes had a specificity of 98.4% (95% CI: 96.7-99.3) and sensitivity of 28.6% (19.4-41.3).
Conclusions:
All scenarios evaluated demonstrated high NPV and low-to-moderate PPV of the diagnostic code list. To maximize clinical utility, NI diagnosis codes should be used with strategies to mitigate the risk of misclassification.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis II
Risk nursing diagnoses represent clinical judgments of an individual, family, or community more vulnerable to developing the health problem than others...
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis I
There are thirteen domains...
Documentation of Nursing Diagnosis
In some settings, data-driven computerized decision support systems are in place, allowing for more accurate nursing diagnoses. The database within one of these systems includes diagnostic labels defining characteristics, activities, and indicators for nursing. A nurse enters...
Intellectual Disability
Guidelines for Nursing Documentation I
Factual:
The following points emphasize the significance of upholding accurate and unbiased documentation in healthcare.
Nursing Diagnosis
The nursing diagnosis focuses on evidence-based...

