Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 22, 2025

qKAT: Quantitative Semi-automated Typing of Killer-cell Immunoglobulin-like Receptor Genes
Published on: March 6, 2019
Mis-mappings between a producer's quantitative test codes and LOINC codes and an algorithm for correcting them
Clement J McDonald1, Seo H Baik1, Zhaonian Zheng1
1Lister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
The Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mapping to local lab codes had a 4.6% error rate in PCORnet data. Automatic error detection significantly reduced this rate to 0.1%.
Area of Science:
- Health Informatics
- Clinical Data Management
- Laboratory Medicine
Background:
- Accurate mapping of laboratory tests to standardized codes like LOINC is essential for data integration in healthcare.
- Existing data integration efforts face challenges due to mapping inaccuracies across different systems and over time.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mapping to local laboratory test codes.
- To determine the rate of LOINC mapping errors within the PCORnet data.
Main Methods:
- Utilized software tools and manual reviews to evaluate LOINC mapping accuracy.
- Analyzed 179 million mapped test results from two PCORnet DataMarts.
- Reported unweighted and weighted mapping error rates, overall and by LOINC term components.
Main Results:
- A 4.6% LOINC mapping error rate was identified across 179,537,986 mapped results for 3029 quantitative tests.
- Error rates were below 5% for common tests (≥100,000 results).
- Significant variation in error rates observed across LOINC classes, with chemistry at 0.4% and hematology at 7.5%.
Conclusions:
- The overall LOINC mapping error rate in PCORnet data is 4.6%, which is substantial but lower than previously published rates.
- Automatic detection and correction algorithms can significantly reduce mapping errors, decreasing the rate to 0.1% for quantitative tests.
More Related Videos
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
08:07Personalized Peptide Arrays for Detection of HLA Alloantibodies in Organ Transplantation
Published on: September 6, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test
Mismatch Repair
The Mutator Protein Family Plays a Key Role in DNA Mismatch Repair
The human genome has more than 3 billion base pairs of DNA per cell. Prior to cell division, that vast amount of genetic...
Improving Translational Accuracy