edits.seer.internal.rules.IF46.xml Maven / Gradle / Ivy
Go to download
Show more of this group Show more artifacts with this name
Show all versions of validation-edits-seer Show documentation
Show all versions of validation-edits-seer Show documentation
Java implemenation of the SEER edits.
<rule id="IF46" name="RX Summ--Surgery Type, Diag Conf (SEER IF46)" tag="N0305" java-path="lines.line" category="inter-field" depends="Year_of_Diagnosis">
<expression><![CDATA[if (line.registryId == '0000001544' && (line.dateOfDiagnosisYear < '2000' || line.dateOfDiagnosisYear == null))
return true
if (line.overRideSurgDxconf == '1')
return true
return !Functions.matches(line.rxSummSurgeryType, /^(0[12567]|[1-8]\d|9[0-8])$/) || Functions.matches(line.diagnosticConfirmation, /^[1234]$/)
]]></expression>
<message>RX Summ--Surgery Type, Diagnostic Confirmation conflict</message>
<description><![CDATA[This edit is skipped under the following conditions:
1. Year of Date of Diagnosis is less than 2000 and Registry ID
is equal to 0000001544 (New Jersey)
If the case was previously reviewed and accepted as coded (Over-ride Surg/Dx Conf = 1) no further checking is performed.
For anyone with a surgical procedure coded in the surgery field (RX Summ--Surgery Type = 01-02, 05-07, 10-98) the diagnosis should be histologically confirmed (Diagnostic Confirmation < 5).
Additional Information:
If the patient had a surgical procedure, most likely there was a microscopic examination of the cancer. This edit forces review of cases with a surgical procedure coded in the RX Summary--Surgery Type field but not a microscopic confirmation code in Diagnostic Confirmation. Verify the surgery and diagnostic confirmation codes, and correct any errors. Correction of errors may require inspection of the abstracted text, either online or as recorded on a paper abstract. Review of the original medical record may be necessary.
Sometimes there are valid reasons why no microscopic confirmation is achieved with surgery, for example, the tissue removed may be inadequate for evaluation. If upon review, the items are correct as coded, an over-ride flag may be set so that the case will not be considered in error when the edit is run again. Enter a 1 in the field Over-ride Surg/DxConf to indicate that the coding is correct.
EXAMPLE
RX SUMMARY--SURGERY TYPE 02, BX OF PRIMARY SITE
DIAGNOSTIC CONFIRMATION 7, RADIOGRAPHY
OVER-RIDE SURG/DXCONF BLANK, NOT REVIEWED
Review of the abstract showed that this was a case of lung cancer diagnosed on x-ray. A bronchial biopsy was done, but was negative for cancer. Clinicians did not believe that malignancy was ruled out, but rather believed that the tumor had not been sampled by the biopsy. Set the Over-ride flag to 1 to indicate that the case is correct as coded.]]></description>
<history>
<event version="SE11-001-17" user="greend" date="2003-09-22">Edit modified to skip cases from New Jersey diagnosed before 2000.</event>
<event version="SE12-002-01" user="murphyr" date="2009-12-18">Edit modified to skip cases from New Jersey that have a blank year of diagnosis.</event>
<event version="SE12-002-01" user="murphyr" date="2009-12-28">Added '3' as a valid Diagnostic Confirmation code.</event>
<event version="SE16-016-08" user="depryf" date="2017-11-22" ref="67674">Edit syntax updated to allow pre-compilation optimization; no change in behavior.</event>
<event version="SE18-019-02" user="kirbyk" date="2019-05-16" ref="68185">Updated documentation; no change in behavior.</event>
<event version="SE18-020-01" user="depryf" date="2020-02-04" ref="68281">Changed property names to align with NAACCR XML IDs.</event>
<event version="SE24-024-04" user="kirbyk" date="2024-04-16" ref="69326">Removed several dependencies.</event>
<event version="SE24-024-06" user="beverung" date="2024-06-07" ref="69468">Fixed NJ skip condition.</event>
</history>
</rule>