[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
Re: st: RE: icd10, dsmiv
Scott Merryman <email@example.com> says:
> Not knowing what ICD10 codes are and letting ignorance be an impediment, I
> download the 4 character codes from http://www.wolfbane.com/icd/, saved the
> data set as icd10.dta and altered -icd9- (saving it as -icd10- ) so it would
> accept the new data set. The functions -icd10 search- , -icd10 lookup-, and
> -icd10 gen- seem to work (see examples below).
There are several reasons why StataCorp has not implemented
ICD-10. Two of the leading ones are:
1. Copyright issues. If curious, see
some of the phrases under the "commercial use" category
"... need to have a Licence Agreement with WHO.
... in exchange for a licence fee."
"... time limited licence ..."
"No amendment of the codes or text of the
classification in any way"
2. Some code descriptions are very long -- close to 200
characters in length. See codes Y83, Y88.3, and 099.1 as
Notice that in this regard the copyright forbids any
alteration (such as a shortened version of the
In regards to the data Scott found, it appears from the first
lines of that web page that it is the 1989 version of the ICD-10
codes. If you go to
and click the link called "current version" it takes you to
which indicates that the current ICD-10 is the 2003 version.
I am not sure (one way or the other) whether Scott's -icd10- user
written program is legal for a researcher to use or whether the
data are up to date enough for your needs, but I thought I should
let you know why an official Stata -icd10- command has not been
Ken Higbee firstname.lastname@example.org
* For searches and help try: