The All CMS Data Feeds dataset is an expansive resource offering access to 118 unique report feeds, providing in-depth insights into various aspects of the U.S. healthcare system. With over 25.8 billion rows of data meticulously collected since 2007, this dataset is invaluable for healthcare professionals, analysts, researchers, and businesses seeking to understand and analyze healthcare trends, performance metrics, and demographic shifts over time. The dataset is updated monthly, ensuring that users always have access to the most current and relevant data available.

Dataset Overview:

118 Report Feeds: - The dataset includes a wide array of report feeds, each providing unique insights into different dimensions of healthcare. These topics range from Medicare and Medicaid service metrics, patient demographics, provider information, financial data, and much more. The breadth of information ensures that users can find relevant data for nearly any healthcare-related analysis. - As CMS releases new report feeds, they are automatically added to this dataset, keeping it current and expanding its utility for users.

25.8 Billion Rows of Data:

• With over 25.8 billion rows of data, this dataset provides a comprehensive view of the U.S. healthcare system. This extensive volume of data allows for granular analysis, enabling users to uncover insights that might be missed in smaller datasets. The data is also meticulously cleaned and aligned, ensuring accuracy and ease of use.

Historical Data Since 2007: - The dataset spans from 2007 to the present, offering a rich historical perspective that is essential for tracking long-term trends and changes in healthcare delivery, policy impacts, and patient outcomes. This historical data is particularly valuable for conducting longitudinal studies and evaluating the effects of various healthcare interventions over time.

Monthly Updates:

• To ensure that users have access to the most current information, the dataset is updated monthly. These updates include new reports as well as revisions to existing data, making the dataset a continuously evolving resource that stays relevant and accurate.

Data Sourced from CMS:

• The data in this dataset is sourced directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). After collection, the data is meticulously cleaned and its attributes are aligned, ensuring consistency, accuracy, and ease of use for any application. Furthermore, any new updates or releases from CMS are automatically integrated into the dataset, keeping it comprehensive and current.

Use Cases:

Market Analysis:

• The dataset is ideal for market analysts who need to understand the dynamics of the healthcare industry. The extensive historical data allows for detailed segmentation and analysis, helping users identify trends, market shifts, and growth opportunities. The comprehensive nature of the data enables users to perform in-depth analyses of specific market segments, making it a valuable tool for strategic decision-making.

Healthcare Research:

• Researchers will find the All CMS Data Feeds dataset to be a robust foundation for academic and commercial research. The historical data, combined with the breadth of coverage across various healthcare metrics, supports rigorous, in-depth analysis. Researchers can explore the effects of healthcare policies, study patient outcomes, analyze provider performance, and more, all within a single, comprehensive dataset.

Performance Tracking:

• Healthcare providers and organizations can use the dataset to track performance metrics over time. By comparing data across different periods, organizations can identify areas for improvement, monitor the effectiveness of initiatives, and ensure compliance with regulatory standards. The dataset provides the detailed, reliable data needed to track and analyze key performance indicators.

Compliance and Regulatory Reporting:

• The dataset is also an essential tool for compliance officers and those involved in regulatory reporting. With detailed data on provider performance, patient outcomes, and healthcare utilization, the dataset helps organizations meet regulatory requirements, prepare for audits, and ensure adherence to best practices. The accuracy and comprehensiveness of the data make it a trusted resource for regulatory compliance.

Data Quality and Reliability:

The All CMS Data Feeds dataset is designed with a strong emphasis on data quality and reliability. Each row of data is meticulously cleaned and aligned, ensuring that it is both accurate and consistent. This attention to detail makes the dataset a trusted resource for high-stakes applications, where data quality is critical.

Integration and Usability:

Ease of Integration:

• The dataset is provided in a CSV format, which is widely compatible with most data analysis tools and platforms. This ensures that users can easily integrate the data into their existing wo...

This is the current Medical Service Study Area. California Medical Service Study Areas are created by the California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI).Check the Data Dictionary for field descriptions.Search for the Medical Service Study Area data on the CHHS Open Data Portal.Checkout the California Healthcare Atlas for more Medical Service Study Area information.This is an update to the MSSA geometries and demographics to reflect the new 2020 Census tract data. The Medical Service Study Area (MSSA) polygon layer represents the best fit mapping of all new 2020 California census tract boundaries to the original 2010 census tract boundaries used in the construction of the original 2010 MSSA file. Each of the state's new 9,129 census tracts was assigned to one of the previously established medical service study areas (excluding tracts with no land area), as identified in this data layer. The MSSA Census tract data is aggregated by HCAI, to create this MSSA data layer. This represents the final re-mapping of 2020 Census tracts to the original 2010 MSSA geometries. The 2010 MSSA were based on U.S. Census 2010 data and public meetings held throughout California.Source of update: American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 data for poverty. For source tables refer to InfoUSA update procedural documentation. The 2010 MSSA Detail layer was developed to update fields affected by population change. The American Community Survey 5-year 2006-2010 population data pertaining to total, in households, race, ethnicity, age, and poverty was used in the update. The 2010 MSSA Census Tract Detail map layer was developed to support geographic information systems (GIS) applications, representing 2010 census tract geography that is the foundation of 2010 medical service study area (MSSA) boundaries. ***This version is the finalized MSSA reconfiguration boundaries based on the US Census Bureau 2010 Census. In 1976 Garamendi Rural Health Services Act, required the development of a geographic framework for determining which parts of the state were rural and which were urban, and for determining which parts of counties and cities had adequate health care resources and which were "medically underserved". Thus, sub-city and sub-county geographic units called "medical service study areas [MSSAs]" were developed, using combinations of census-defined geographic units, established following General Rules promulgated by a statutory commission. After each subsequent census the MSSAs were revised. In the scheduled revisions that followed the 1990 census, community meetings of stakeholders (including county officials, and representatives of hospitals and community health centers) were held in larger metropolitan areas. The meetings were designed to develop consensus as how to draw the sub-city units so as to best display health care disparities. The importance of involving stakeholders was heightened in 1992 when the United States Department of Health and Human Services' Health and Resources Administration entered a formal agreement to recognize the state-determined MSSAs as "rational service areas" for federal recognition of "health professional shortage areas" and "medically underserved areas". After the 2000 census, two innovations transformed the process, and set the stage for GIS to emerge as a major factor in health care resource planning in California. First, the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development [OSHPD], which organizes the community stakeholder meetings and provides the staff to administer the MSSAs, entered into an Enterprise GIS contract. Second, OSHPD authorized at least one community meeting to be held in each of the 58 counties, a significant number of which were wholly rural or frontier counties. For populous Los Angeles County, 11 community meetings were held. As a result, health resource data in California are collected and organized by 541 geographic units. The boundaries of these units were established by community healthcare experts, with the objective of maximizing their usefulness for needs assessment purposes. The most dramatic consequence was introducing a data simultaneously displayed in a GIS format. A two-person team, incorporating healthcare policy and GIS expertise, conducted the series of meetings, and supervised the development of the 2000-census configuration of the MSSAs.MSSA Configuration Guidelines (General Rules):- Each MSSA is composed of one or more complete census tracts.- As a general rule, MSSAs are deemed to be "rational service areas [RSAs]" for purposes of designating health professional shortage areas [HPSAs], medically underserved areas [MUAs] or medically underserved populations [MUPs].- MSSAs will not cross county lines.- To the extent practicable, all census-defined places within the MSSA are within 30 minutes travel time to the largest population center within the MSSA, except in those circumstances where meeting this criterion would require splitting a census tract.- To the extent practicable, areas that, standing alone, would meet both the definition of an MSSA and a Rural MSSA, should not be a part of an Urban MSSA.- Any Urban MSSA whose population exceeds 200,000 shall be divided into two or more Urban MSSA Subdivisions.- Urban MSSA Subdivisions should be within a population range of 75,000 to 125,000, but may not be smaller than five square miles in area. If removing any census tract on the perimeter of the Urban MSSA Subdivision would cause the area to fall below five square miles in area, then the population of the Urban MSSA may exceed 125,000. - To the extent practicable, Urban MSSA Subdivisions should reflect recognized community and neighborhood boundaries and take into account such demographic information as income level and ethnicity. Rural Definitions: A rural MSSA is an MSSA adopted by the Commission, which has a population density of less than 250 persons per square mile, and which has no census defined place within the area with a population in excess of 50,000. Only the population that is located within the MSSA is counted in determining the population of the census defined place. A frontier MSSA is a rural MSSA adopted by the Commission which has a population density of less than 11 persons per square mile. Any MSSA which is not a rural or frontier MSSA is an urban MSSA. Last updated December 6th 2024.

Success.ai’s Healthcare Industry Leads Data and B2B Contact Data for US Healthcare Professionals offers an extensive and verified database tailored to connect businesses with key executives and administrators in the healthcare industry across the United States. With over 170M verified profiles, including work emails and direct phone numbers, this dataset enables precise targeting of decision-makers in hospitals, clinics, and healthcare organizations.

Backed by AI-driven validation technology for unmatched accuracy and reliability, this contact data empowers your marketing, sales, and recruitment strategies. Designed for industry professionals, our continuously updated profiles provide the actionable insights you need to grow your business in the competitive healthcare sector.

Key Features of Success.ai’s US Healthcare Contact Data:

• Comprehensive Healthcare Sector Coverage Access detailed contact information for professionals across the healthcare spectrum:

Hospital Executives: CEOs, CFOs, and COOs managing top-tier facilities. Healthcare Administrators: Decision-makers driving operational excellence. Medical Professionals: Physicians, specialists, and nurse practitioners. Clinic Managers: Leaders in small and mid-sized healthcare organizations.

• AI-Validated Accuracy and Updates

  99% Verified Accuracy: Our advanced AI technology ensures data reliability for optimal engagement. Real-Time Updates: Profiles are continuously refreshed to maintain relevance and accuracy. Minimized Bounce Rates: Save time and resources by reaching verified contacts.

• Customizable Delivery Options Choose how you access the data to match your business requirements:

API Integration: Connect our data directly to your CRM or sales platform. Flat File Delivery: Receive customized datasets in formats suited to your needs.

Why Choose Success.ai for Healthcare Data?

• Best Price Guarantee We ensure competitive pricing for our verified contact data, offering the most comprehensive and cost-effective solution in the market.

• Compliance-Driven and Ethical Data Our data collection adheres to strict global standards, including HIPAA, GDPR, and CCPA compliance, ensuring secure and ethical usage.

• Strategic Benefits for Your Business Success.ai’s US healthcare professional data unlocks numerous business opportunities:

Targeted Marketing: Develop tailored campaigns aimed at healthcare executives and decision-makers. Efficient Sales Outreach: Engage with key contacts to accelerate your sales process. Recruitment Optimization: Access verified profiles to identify and recruit top talent in the healthcare industry. Market Intelligence: Use detailed firmographic and demographic insights to guide strategic decisions. Partnership Development: Build valuable relationships within the healthcare ecosystem.

• Data Highlights 170M+ Verified Profiles 50M Direct Phone Numbers 700M Global Professional Profiles 70M Verified Company Profiles

Key APIs for Advanced Functionality

• Enrichment API Enhance your existing contact data with real-time updates, ensuring accuracy and relevance for your outreach initiatives.

• Lead Generation API Drive high-quality lead generation efforts by utilizing verified contact information, including work emails and direct phone numbers, for up to 860,000 API calls per day.

• Use Cases

1. Healthcare Marketing Campaigns Target verified executives and administrators to deliver personalized and impactful marketing campaigns.

2. Sales Enablement Connect with key decision-makers in healthcare organizations, ensuring higher conversion rates and shorter sales cycles.

3. Talent Acquisition Source and engage healthcare professionals and administrators with accurate, up-to-date contact information.

4. Strategic Partnerships Foster collaborations with healthcare institutions and professionals to expand your business network.

5. Industry Analysis Leverage enriched contact data to gain insights into the US healthcare market, helping you refine your strategies.

• What Sets Success.ai Apart?

Verified Accuracy: AI-driven technology ensures 99% reliability for all contact details. Comprehensive Reach: Covering healthcare professionals from large hospital systems to smaller clinics nationwide. Flexible Access: Customizable data delivery methods tailored to your business needs. Ethical Standards: Fully compliant with healthcare and data protection regulations.

Success.ai’s B2B Contact Data for US Healthcare Professionals is the ultimate solution for connecting with industry leaders, driving impactful marketing campaigns, and optimizing your recruitment strategies. Our commitment to quality, accuracy, and affordability ensures you achieve exceptional results while adhering to ethical and legal standards.

No one beats us on price. Period.

This page shares the technical validation datasets used to evaluate a Large Dataset of Annotated Incident Reports on Medication Errors and its machine annotator. The files contain in this repository include the IFMIR gold standard dataset (CrossValid_IFMIR_522.xlsx), randomly sampled labeled incident reports from 2010 – 2020 (InternalValid_JQ2010-20_40.xlsx), randomly sampled labeled incident reports from 2021 (ExternalValid_JQ2021_20.xlsx) and Error-free reports (Error_analysis.xlsx).

To use any of these datasets, one should also cite this original data source: Medical Adverse Event Information Collection Project [Iryō jiko jōhō shūshū-tō jigyō]　 Japan Council for Quality Health Care; 2022 [Available from: https://www.med-safe.jp/index.html.]

Andalusian Public Healthcare System (SSPA)

In Spain, the competence for healthcare is the responsibility of the regions. The Andalusian Public Healthcare System (SSPA) is an ecosystem of public and universal healthcare provision, which is made up of a series of public agencies, managed by the Government of Andalusia.

The SSPA has a total of 32 hospitals in the region of Andalusia.

Within this ecosystem, the main healthcare provider agency is the Andalusian Health Service.

Andalusian Health Service (SAS)

The Andalusian Health Service, created in 1986 by Law 8/1986, of May 6, 1986, on the Andalusian Health Service, is attached to the Regional Ministry of Health and Consumer Affairs and performs the functions attributed to it under the supervision and control of the same.

Its mission is to provide healthcare to the citizens of Andalusia, offering quality public health services, ensuring accessibility, equity and user satisfaction, seeking efficiency and optimal use of resources.

The SAS guarantees free public health care to more than 8 million inhabitants, which represents about 17% of the Spanish population. The Andalusian Health Service has 28 hospitals, distributed throughout Andalusia. It is also functionally responsible for the centers belonging to the Public Health Business Agencies and the Aljarafe Public Health Consortium. In addition, there are 14 Health Management Areas.

The Andalusian Health Service is an administrative agency of those provided for in Article 65 of Law 9/2007, of October 22, is attached to the Ministry of Health and Consumer Affairs, depending specifically on the Vice-Ministry, according to Decree 156/2022, of August 9, which establishes the organisational structure of the Ministry of Health and Consumer Affairs. The Andalusian Health Service exercises the functions specified in this Decree, subject to the guidelines and general criteria of health policy in Andalusia and, in particular, the following:

- The management of the set of health services in the field of health promotion and protection, disease prevention, healthcare and rehabilitation that corresponds to it in the territory of the Autonomous Community of Andalusia.

- The administration and management of the health institutions, centers and services that act under its organic and functional dependence.

- The management of the human, material and financial resources assigned to it for the development of its functions.

Diraya: system used in the Andalusian Health Service to support the Electronic Health Record in Andalusia

Diraya is the system used in the Andalusian Health Service to support electronic health records. It integrates all the health information of each person treated in the healthcare centers in Andalusia, so that it is available wherever and whenever it is necessary to treat them, and it is also used for the management of the healthcare system.

Diraya's conceptual model and technological architecture have aroused significant interest in other healthcare administrations thanks to, among others, cutting-edge services such as the electronic prescription or the centralised appointment system.

A description of the Diraya system (objectives, basic components, modules, functional and technological architecture, impact assessment of its implementation, etc.) can be found in the following document: Health Care Information and Management Integrated System.

Uptake and activity data relating to NHS continuing healthcare and NHS-funded nursing care in England.

Abstract

👂💉 EHRSHOT is a dataset for benchmarking the few-shot performance of foundation models for clinical prediction tasks. EHRSHOT contains de-identified structured data (e.g., diagnosis and procedure codes, medications, lab values) from the electronic health records (EHRs) of 6,739 Stanford Medicine patients and includes 15 prediction tasks. Unlike MIMIC-III/IV and other popular EHR datasets, EHRSHOT is longitudinal and includes data beyond ICU and emergency department patients.

⚡️Quickstart 1. To recreate the original EHRSHOT paper, download the EHRSHOT_ASSETS.zip file from the "Files" tab 2. To work with OMOP CDM formatted data, download all the tables in the "Tables" tab

⚙️ Please see the "Methodology" section below for details on the dataset and downloadable files.

Methodology

1. 📖 Overview

EHRSHOT is a benchmark for evaluating models on few-shot learning for patient classification tasks. The dataset contains:

• **6,739 **patients
• 41.6 million clinical events
• 921,499 visits
• 15 prediction tasks

%3C!-- --%3E

2. 💽 Dataset

EHRSHOT is sourced from Stanford’s STARR-OMOP database.

• Data follows the OMOP CDM and is fully de-identified.
• Unlike most other EHR research datasets, EHRSHOT is not restricted to ED/ICU visits and instead includes longitudinal patient data for all hospital encounter types.
• EHRSHOT does not contain clinical notes or images.

%3C!-- --%3E

We provide two versions of the dataset:

• EHRSHOT-Original is the same exact dataset used in the original EHRSHOT paper.
• EHRSHOT-OMOP is a more complete version of the EHRSHOT dataset which includes all OMOP CDM tables and additional OMOP metadata.

%3C!-- --%3E

To access the raw data, please see the "Tables" and "Files"** **tabs above:

3. 💽 Data Files and Formats

We provide EHRSHOT in two file formats:

• OMOP CDM v5.4
• Medical Event Data Standard (MEDS)

%3C!-- --%3E

Within the "Tables" tab...

1. %3Cu%3EEHRSHOT-OMOP%3C/u%3E

* Dataset Version: EHRSHOT-OMOP

* Notes: Contains all OMOP CDM tables for the EHRSHOT patients. Note that this dataset is slightly different than the original EHRSHOT dataset, as these tables contain the full OMOP schema rather than a filtered subset.

Within the "Files" tab...

1. %3Cu%3EEHRSHOT_ASSETS.zip%3C/u%3E

* Dataset Version: EHRSHOT-Original

* Data Format: FEMR 0.1.16

* Notes: The original EHRSHOT dataset as detailed in the paper. Also includes model weights.

2. %3Cu%3EEHRSHOT_MEDS.zip%3C/u%3E

* Dataset Version: EHRSHOT-Original

* Data Format: MEDS 0.3.3

* Notes: The original EHRSHOT dataset as detailed in the paper. It does not include any models.

3. %3Cu%3EEHRSHOT_OMOP_MEDS.zip%3C/u%3E

* Dataset Version: EHRSHOT-OMOP

* Data Format: MEDS 0.3.3 + MEDS-ETL 0.3.8

* Notes: Converts the dataset from EHRSHOT-OMOP into MEDS format via the `meds_etl_omop`command from MEDS-ETL.

4. %3Cu%3EEHRSHOT_OMOP_MEDS_Reader.zip%3C/u%3E

* Dataset Version: EHRSHOT-OMOP

* Data Format: MEDS Reader 0.1.9 + MEDS 0.3.3 + MEDS-ETL 0.3.8

* Notes: Same data as EHRSHOT_OMOP_MEDS.zip, but converted into a MEDS-Reader database for faster reads.

4. 🤖 Model

We also release the full weights of **CLMBR-T-base, **a 141M parameter clinical foundation model pretrained on the structured EHR data of 2.57M patients. Please download from https://huggingface.co/StanfordShahLab/clmbr-t-base

**5. 🧑‍💻 Code **

Please see our Github repo to obtain code for loading the dataset and running a set of pretrained baseline models: https://github.com/som-shahlab/ehrshot-benchmark/

Usage

**NOTE: You must authenticate to Redivis using your formal affiliation's email address. If you use gmail or other personal email addresses, you will not be granted access. **

Access to the EHRSHOT dataset requires the following:

• Verified Affiliation with an **Academic, Government, **o

The fifth round of the Global Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health Policy Survey was conducted in 2018-2019. For this survey, the questionnaire was administered online to each member state via World Health Organization (WHO) regional offices. Each WHO country office was asked to coordinate completion of the survey with the Ministry of Health and other UN partners. Respondents from each country shared original source documents including national policies, strategies, laws, guidelines, reports that are relevant to the areas of sexual and reproductive health, maternal and newborn health, child health, adolescent health, gender-based violence and cross-cutting issues. Cross cutting issues include policies, guidelines and legislation for human right to healthcare, financial protection, and quality of care.The WHO Maternal and Newborn Health page can be found here, and the WHO data can also be accessed on their data portal page, here. Maternal and Newborn Health Policy data, provided by the WHO, show the below data attributes for countries that have an International Confederation of Midwives (ICM) membership and have completed the required surveys. Essential Medicines List Includes: Magnesium sulfate for use during pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum careOxytocin for use during pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum careMisoprostol tablets for use during pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum careAmpicillin or Amoxicillin injections for use during pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum careGentamicin injectionMetronidazole injectionProcaine penicillin injectionBenzathine penicillin injectionDexamethasone injectionChlorhexidineCeftriaxoneIntravenous tranexamic acidNational list of Commodities Includes:Obstetric ultrasound machineSelf-inflating bag with neonatal and paediatric masks of different sizes and valves Oxygen supplyVaccuum aspiratorHealth Access Policy: User fee exemptions for antenatal care services for women of reproductive ageUser fee exemptions for normal childbirth services for women of reproductive ageUser fee exemptions for postnatal care for mothersUser fee exemptions for postnatal care for newbornsMaternal and Newborn Health Policies: Policy/legislation on free access to health services for newborns (0-4 weeks)Policy on free access to health services for pregnant womenNational policy on childbirthNational policy/guideline on right of every women to have access to skilled care at childbirthNational policy on postnatal care for mothers and newbornsNational policy on management of low birth weight and preterm newbornsNational standards for management of newborn infants with severe illnessContinuous professional education system in place for primary health-care clinicians and/or nurses to receive specific training for maternal and newborn healthNational policy on regulation of midwifery care providers based on ICMNational policy recommending midwife-led care for pregnancyNational policy recommending midwife-led care for childbirthNational policy recommending midwife-led care for the postnatal periodNational policy/law on maternal death notification within 24 hoursNational policy/law on maternal death reviewNational panel to review maternal deathsFrequency of meetings of national panel to review maternal deathsNational policy/law to review stillbirthsFacility stillbirth review process in placeNational policy/law to review neonatal deathsFacility neonatal death review process in placeThis data set is just one of the many datasets on the Global Midwives Hub, a digital resource with open data, maps, and mapping applications (among other things), to support advocacy for improved maternal and newborn services, supported by the International Confederation of Midwives (ICM), UNFPA, WHO, and Direct Relief.

After May 3, 2024, this dataset and webpage will no longer be updated because hospitals are no longer required to report data on COVID-19 hospital admissions, and hospital capacity and occupancy data, to HHS through CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network. Data voluntarily reported to NHSN after May 1, 2024, will be available starting May 10, 2024, at COVID Data Tracker Hospitalizations.

The following dataset provides facility-level data for hospital utilization aggregated on a weekly basis (Sunday to Saturday). These are derived from reports with facility-level granularity across two main sources: (1) HHS TeleTracking, and (2) reporting provided directly to HHS Protect by state/territorial health departments on behalf of their healthcare facilities.

The hospital population includes all hospitals registered with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) as of June 1, 2020. It includes non-CMS hospitals that have reported since July 15, 2020. It does not include psychiatric, rehabilitation, Indian Health Service (IHS) facilities, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities, Defense Health Agency (DHA) facilities, and religious non-medical facilities.

For a given entry, the term “collection_week” signifies the start of the period that is aggregated. For example, a “collection_week” of 2020-11-15 means the average/sum/coverage of the elements captured from that given facility starting and including Sunday, November 15, 2020, and ending and including reports for Saturday, November 21, 2020.

Reported elements include an append of either “_coverage”, “_sum”, or “_avg”.

• A “_coverage” append denotes how many times the facility reported that element during that collection week.
• A “_sum” append denotes the sum of the reports provided for that facility for that element during that collection week.
• A “_avg” append is the average of the reports provided for that facility for that element during that collection week.

The file will be updated weekly. No statistical analysis is applied to impute non-response. For averages, calculations are based on the number of values collected for a given hospital in that collection week. Suppression is applied to the file for sums and averages less than four (4). In these cases, the field will be replaced with “-999,999”.

A story page was created to display both corrected and raw datasets and can be accessed at this link: https://healthdata.gov/stories/s/nhgk-5gpv

This data is preliminary and subject to change as more data become available. Data is available starting on July 31, 2020.

Sometimes, reports for a given facility will be provided to both HHS TeleTracking and HHS Protect. When this occurs, to ensure that there are not duplicate reports, deduplication is applied according to prioritization rules within HHS Protect.

For influenza fields listed in the file, the current HHS guidance marks these fields as optional. As a result, coverage of these elements are varied.

For recent updates to the dataset, scroll to the bottom of the dataset description.

On May 3, 2021, the following fields have been added to this data set.

• hhs_ids
• previous_day_admission_adult_covid_confirmed_7_day_coverage
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_7_day_coverage
• previous_day_admission_adult_covid_suspected_7_day_coverage
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_suspected_7_day_coverage
• previous_week_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_administered_7_day_sum
• total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_none_7_day_sum
• total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_one_7_day_sum
• total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_all_7_day_sum
• previous_week_patients_covid_vaccinated_doses_one_7_day_sum
• previous_week_patients_covid_vaccinated_doses_all_7_day_sum

On May 8, 2021, this data set has been converted to a corrected data set. The corrections applied to this data set are to smooth out data anomalies caused by keyed in data errors. To help determine which records have had corrections made to it. An additional Boolean field called is_corrected has been added.

On May 13, 2021 Changed vaccination fields from sum to max or min fields. This reflects the maximum or minimum number reported for that metric in a given week.

On June 7, 2021 Changed vaccination fields from max or min fields to Wednesday reported only. This reflects that the number reported for that metric is only reported on Wednesdays in a given week.

On September 20, 2021, the following has been updated: The use of analytic dataset as a source.

On January 19, 2022, the following fields have been added to this dataset:

• inpatient_beds_used_covid_7_day_avg
• inpatient_beds_used_covid_7_day_sum
• inpatient_beds_used_covid_7_day_coverage

On April 28, 2022, the following pediatric fields have been added to this dataset:

• all_pediatric_inpatient_bed_occupied_7_day_avg
• all_pediatric_inpatient_bed_occupied_7_day_coverage
• all_pediatric_inpatient_bed_occupied_7_day_sum
• all_pediatric_inpatient_beds_7_day_avg
• all_pediatric_inpatient_beds_7_day_coverage
• all_pediatric_inpatient_beds_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_0_4_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_12_17_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_5_11_7_day_sum
• previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_unknown_7_day_sum
• staffed_icu_pediatric_patients_confirmed_covid_7_day_avg
• staffed_icu_pediatric_patients_confirmed_covid_7_day_coverage
• staffed_icu_pediatric_patients_confirmed_covid_7_day_sum
• staffed_pediatric_icu_bed_occupancy_7_day_avg
• staffed_pediatric_icu_bed_occupancy_7_day_coverage
• staffed_pediatric_icu_bed_occupancy_7_day_sum
• total_staffed_pediatric_icu_beds_7_day_avg
• total_staffed_pediatric_icu_beds_7_day_coverage
• total_staffed_pediatric_icu_beds_7_day_sum

On October 24, 2022, the data includes more analytical calculations in efforts to provide a cleaner dataset. For a raw version of this dataset, please follow this link: https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Impact-and-Hospital-Capa/uqq2-txqb

Due to changes in reporting requirements, after June 19, 2023, a collection week is defined as starting on a Sunday and ending on the next Saturday.

Hospitals Registered with MedicareThis feature layer, utilizing data from the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), depicts all hospitals that are currently registered with Medicare in the U.S. Per NIH, "Since the passage of Medicare legislation in 1965, Section 1861 of the Social Security Act has stated that hospitals participating in Medicare must meet certain requirements specified in the act and that the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) [now the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)] may impose additional requirements found necessary to ensure the health and safety of Medicare beneficiaries receiving services in hospitals. On this basis, the Conditions of Participation, a set of regulations setting minimum health and safety standards for hospitals participating in Medicare, were promulgated in 1966 and substantially revised in 1986."Ascension Columbia St Mary's HospitalData currency: 11/26/2024Data modification: This data was created using the geocoding process on the CSV file.Data downloaded from: Hospital General InformationFor more information: HospitalsSupport documentation: Data dictionaryFor feedback, please contact: ArcGIScomNationalMaps@esri.comCenters of Medicare and Medicaid ServicesPer USA.gov, "The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) provides health coverage to more than 100 million people through Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and the Health Insurance Marketplace. The CMS seeks to strengthen and modernize the Nation’s health care system, to provide access to high quality care and improved health at lower costs."

The Minimum Data Set (MDS) Frequency data summarizes health status indicators for active residents currently in nursing homes. The MDS is part of the Federally-mandated process for clinical assessment of all residents in Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes. This process provides a comprehensive assessment of each resident's functional capabilities and helps nursing home staff identify health problems. Care Area Assessments (CAAs) are part of this process, and provide the foundation upon which a resident's individual care plan is formulated. MDS assessments are completed for all residents in certified nursing homes, regardless of source of payment for the individual resident. MDS assessments are required for residents on admission to the nursing facility, periodically, and on discharge. All assessments are completed within specific guidelines and time frames. In most cases, participants in the assessment process are licensed health care professionals employed by the nursing home. MDS information is transmitted electronically by nursing homes to the national MDS database at CMS. When reviewing the MDS 3.0 Frequency files, some common software programs e.g., ‘Microsoft Excel’ might inaccurately strip leading zeros from designated code values (i.e., "01" becomes "1") or misinterpret code ranges as dates (i.e., O0600 ranges such as 02-04 are misread as 04-Feb). As each piece of software is unique, if you encounter an issue when reading the CSV file of Frequency data, please open the file in a plain text editor such as ‘Notepad’ or ‘TextPad’ to review the underlying data, before reaching out to CMS for assistance.

Organizations can license synthetic, structured data generated by Syntegra from electronic health record systems of community hospitals across the United States, reaching beyond just claims and Rx data.

The synthetic data provides a detailed picture of the patient's journey throughout their hospital stay, including patient demographic information and payer type, as well as rich data not found in any other sources. Examples of this data include: drugs given (timing and dosing), patient location (e.g., ICU, floor, ER), lab results (timing by day and hour), physician roles (e.g., surgeon, attending), medications given, and vital signs. The participating community hospitals with bed sizes ranging from 25 to 532 provide unique visibility and assessment of variation in care outside of large academic medical centers and healthcare networks.

Our synthetic data engine is trained on a broadly representative dataset made up of deep clinical information of approximately 6 million unique patient records and 18 million encounters over 5 years of history. Notably, synthetic data generation allows for the creation of any number of records needed to power your project.

EHR data is available in the following formats: — Cleaned, analytics-ready (a layer of clean and normalized concepts in Tuva Health’s standard relational data model format — FHIR USCDI (labs, medications, vitals, encounters, patients, etc.)

The synthetic data maintains full statistical accuracy, yet does not contain any actual patients, thus removing any patient privacy liability risk. Privacy is preserved in a way that goes beyond HIPAA or GDPR compliance. Our industry-leading metrics prove that both privacy and fidelity are fully maintained.

— Generate the data needed for product development, testing, demo, or other needs — Access data at a scalable price point — Build your desired population, both in size and demographics — Scale up and down to fit specific needs, increasing efficiency and affordability

Syntegra's synthetic data engine also has the ability to augment the original data: — Expand population sizes, rare cohorts, or outcomes of interest — Address algorithmic fairness by correcting bias or introducing intentional bias — Conditionally generate data to inform scenario planning — Impute missing value to minimize gaps in the data

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) is a unique and powerful database designed to support various types of analyses of national readmission rates for all payers and the uninsured. The NRD includes discharges for patients with and without repeat hospital visits in a year and those who have died in the hospital. Repeat stays may or may not be related. The criteria to determine the relationship between hospital admissions is left to the analyst using the NRD. This database addresses a large gap in health care data - the lack of nationally representative information on hospital readmissions for all ages. Outcomes of interest include national readmission rates, reasons for returning to the hospital for care, and the hospital costs for discharges with and without readmissions. Unweighted, the NRD contains data from approximately 18 million discharges each year. Weighted, it estimates roughly 35 million discharges. Developed through a Federal-State-Industry partnership sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HCUP data inform decision making at the national, State, and community levels. The NRD is drawn from HCUP State Inpatient Databases (SID) containing verified patient linkage numbers that can be used to track a person across hospitals within a State, while adhering to strict privacy guidelines. The NRD is not designed to support regional, State-, or hospital-specific readmission analyses. The NRD contains more than 100 clinical and non-clinical data elements provided in a hospital discharge abstract. Data elements include but are not limited to: diagnoses, procedures, patient demographics (e.g., sex, age), expected source of payer, regardless of expected payer, including but not limited to Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, self-pay, or those billed as ‘no charge, discharge month, quarter, and year, total charges, length of stay, and data elements essential to readmission analyses. The NIS excludes data elements that could directly or indirectly identify individuals. Restricted access data files are available with a data use agreement and brief online security training.

Sets out the rules for an end to end, patient level data set that captures data relating to patient details, NHS Continuing health care (CHC) eligibility, activity, reviews and care packages.

The "COVID-19 Reported Patient Impact and Hospital Capacity by Facility" dataset from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, filtered for Connecticut. View the full dataset and detailed metadata here: https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Impact-and-Hospital-Capa/anag-cw7u The following dataset provides facility-level data for hospital utilization aggregated on a weekly basis (Friday to Thursday). These are derived from reports with facility-level granularity across two main sources: (1) HHS TeleTracking, and (2) reporting provided directly to HHS Protect by state/territorial health departments on behalf of their healthcare facilities. The hospital population includes all hospitals registered with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) as of June 1, 2020. It includes non-CMS hospitals that have reported since July 15, 2020. It does not include psychiatric, rehabilitation, Indian Health Service (IHS) facilities, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities, Defense Health Agency (DHA) facilities, and religious non-medical facilities. For a given entry, the term “collection_week” signifies the start of the period that is aggregated. For example, a “collection_week” of 2020-11-20 means the average/sum/coverage of the elements captured from that given facility starting and including Friday, November 20, 2020, and ending and including reports for Thursday, November 26, 2020. Reported elements include an append of either “_coverage”, “_sum”, or “_avg”. A “_coverage” append denotes how many times the facility reported that element during that collection week. A “_sum” append denotes the sum of the reports provided for that facility for that element during that collection week. A “_avg” append is the average of the reports provided for that facility for that element during that collection week. The file will be updated weekly. No statistical analysis is applied to impute non-response. For averages, calculations are based on the number of values collected for a given hospital in that collection week. Suppression is applied to the file for sums and averages less than four (4). In these cases, the field will be replaced with “-999,999”. This data is preliminary and subject to change as more data become available. Data is available starting on July 31, 2020. Sometimes, reports for a given facility will be provided to both HHS TeleTracking and HHS Protect. When this occurs, to ensure that there are not duplicate reports, deduplication is applied according to prioritization rules within HHS Protect. For influenza fields listed in the file, the current HHS guidance marks these fields as optional. As a result, coverage of these elements are varied. On May 3, 2021, the following fields have been added to this data set. hhs_ids previous_day_admission_adult_covid_confirmed_7_day_coverage previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_confirmed_7_day_coverage previous_day_admission_adult_covid_suspected_7_day_coverage previous_day_admission_pediatric_covid_suspected_7_day_coverage previous_week_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_administered_7_day_sum total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_none_7_day_sum total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_one_7_day_sum total_personnel_covid_vaccinated_doses_all_7_day_sum previous_week_patients_covid_vaccinated_doses_one_7_day_sum previous_week_patients_covid_vaccinated_doses_all_7_day_sum On May 8, 2021, this data set has been converted to a corrected data set. The corrections applied to this data set are to smooth out data anomalies caused by keyed in data errors. To help determine which records have had corrections made to it. An additional Boolean field called is_corrected has been added. To see the numbers as reported by the facilities, go to: https://healthdata.gov/Hospital/COVID-19-Reported-Patient-Impact-and-Hospital-Capa/uqq2-txqb On May 13, 2021 Changed vaccination fields from sum to max or min fields. This reflects the maximum or minimum number report

Update — December 7, 2014. – Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is not working for many reasons, for example: 1. Incorrect in their foundations (paradox): hierarchical levels of evidence are supported by opinions (i.e., lowest strength of evidence according to EBM) instead of real data collected from different types of study designs (i.e., evidence). http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1122534 2. The effect of criminal practices by pharmaceutical companies is only possible because of the complicity of others: healthcare systems, professional associations, governmental and academic institutions. Pharmaceutical companies also corrupt at the personal level, politicians and political parties are on their payroll, medical professionals seduced by different types of gifts in exchange of prescriptions (i.e., bribery) which very likely results in patients not receiving the proper treatment for their disease, many times there is no such thing: healthy persons not needing pharmacological treatments of any kind are constantly misdiagnosed and treated with unnecessary drugs. Some medical professionals are converted in K.O.L. which is only a puppet appearing on stage to spread lies to their peers, a person supposedly trained to improve the well-being of others, now deceits on behalf of pharmaceutical companies. Probably the saddest thing is that many honest doctors are being misled by these lies created by the rules of pharmaceutical marketing instead of scientific, medical, and ethical principles. Interpretation of EBM in this context was not anticipated by their creators. “The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don’t sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs.” ―Peter C. Gøtzsche “doctors and their organisations should recognise that it is unethical to receive money that has been earned in part through crimes that have harmed those people whose interests doctors are expected to take care of. Many crimes would be impossible to carry out if doctors weren’t willing to participate in them.” —Peter C Gøtzsche, The BMJ, 2012, Big pharma often commits corporate crime, and this must be stopped. Pending (Colombia): Health Promoter Entities (In Spanish: EPS ―Empresas Promotoras de Salud).

1. Misinterpretations New technologies or concepts are difficult to understand in the beginning, it doesn’t matter their simplicity, we need to get used to new tools aimed to improve our professional practice. Probably the best explanation is here in these videos (credits to Antonio Villafaina for sharing these videos with me). English https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQHX-SjgQvQ&w=420&h=315 Spanish https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DApozQBrlhU&w=420&h=315 ----------------------- Hypothesis: hierarchical levels of evidence based medicine are wrong Dear Editor, I have data to support the hypothesis described in the title of this letter. Before rejecting the null hypothesis I would like to ask the following open question:Could you support with data that hierarchical levels of evidence based medicine are correct? (1,2) Additional explanation to this question: – Only respond to this question attaching publicly available raw data.– Be aware that more than a question this is a challenge: I have data (i.e., evidence) which is contrary to classic (i.e., McMaster) or current (i.e., Oxford) hierarchical levels of evidence based medicine. An important part of this data (but not all) is publicly available. References
2. Ramirez, Jorge H (2014): The EBM challenge. figshare. http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1135873
3. The EBM Challenge Day 1: No Answers. Competing interests: I endorse the principles of open data in human biomedical research Read this letter on The BMJ – August 13, 2014.http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3725/rr/762595Re: Greenhalgh T, et al. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 2014; 348: g3725. _ Fileset contents Raw data: Excel archive: Raw data, interactive figures, and PubMed search terms. Google Spreadsheet is also available (URL below the article description). Figure 1. Unadjusted (Fig 1A) and adjusted (Fig 1B) PubMed publication trends (01/01/1992 to 30/06/2014). Figure 2. Adjusted PubMed publication trends (07/01/2008 to 29/06/2014) Figure 3. Google search trends: Jan 2004 to Jun 2014 / 1-week periods. Figure 4. PubMed publication trends (1962-2013) systematic reviews and meta-analysis, clinical trials, and observational studies.
   Figure 5. Ramirez, Jorge H (2014): Infographics: Unpublished US phase 3 clinical trials (2002-2014) completed before Jan 2011 = 50.8%. figshare.http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1121675 Raw data: "13377 studies found for: Completed | Interventional Studies | Phase 3 | received from 01/01/2002 to 01/01/2014 | Worldwide". This database complies with the terms and conditions of ClinicalTrials.gov: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/about-site/terms-conditions Supplementary Figures (S1-S6). PubMed publication delay in the indexation processes does not explain the descending trends in the scientific output of evidence-based medicine. Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge the following persons for providing valuable concepts in data visualization and infographics:
4. Maria Fernanda Ramírez. Professor of graphic design. Universidad del Valle. Cali, Colombia.
5. Lorena Franco. Graphic design student. Universidad del Valle. Cali, Colombia. Related articles by this author (Jorge H. Ramírez)
6. Ramirez JH. Lack of transparency in clinical trials: a call for action. Colomb Med (Cali) 2013;44(4):243-6. URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24892242
7. Ramirez JH. Re: Evidence based medicine is broken (17 June 2014). http://www.bmj.com/node/759181
8. Ramirez JH. Re: Global rules for global health: why we need an independent, impartial WHO (19 June 2014). http://www.bmj.com/node/759151
9. Ramirez JH. PubMed publication trends (1992 to 2014): evidence based medicine and clinical practice guidelines (04 July 2014). http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3725/rr/759895 Recommended articles
10. Greenhalgh Trisha, Howick Jeremy,Maskrey Neal. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ 2014;348:g3725
11. Spence Des. Evidence based medicine is broken BMJ 2014; 348:g22
12. Schünemann Holger J, Oxman Andrew D,Brozek Jan, Glasziou Paul, JaeschkeRoman, Vist Gunn E et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies BMJ 2008; 336:1106
13. Lau Joseph, Ioannidis John P A, TerrinNorma, Schmid Christopher H, OlkinIngram. The case of the misleading funnel plot BMJ 2006; 333:597
14. Moynihan R, Henry D, Moons KGM (2014) Using Evidence to Combat Overdiagnosis and Overtreatment: Evaluating Treatments, Tests, and Disease Definitions in the Time of Too Much. PLoS Med 11(7): e1001655. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001655
15. Katz D. A-holistic view of evidence based medicinehttp://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2014/05/02/a-holistic-view-of-evidence-based-medicine/ ---

Technical notes and documentation on the common data model of the project CONCEPT-DM2.

This publication corresponds to the Common Data Model (CDM) specification of the CONCEPT-DM2 project for the implementation of a federated network analysis of the healthcare pathway of type 2 diabetes.

Aims of the CONCEPT-DM2 project:

General aim: To analyse chronic care effectiveness and efficiency of care pathways in diabetes, assuming the relevance of care pathways as independent factors of health outcomes using data from real life world (RWD) from five Spanish Regional Health Systems.

Main specific aims:

• To characterize the care pathways in patients with diabetes through the whole care system in terms of process indicators and pharmacologic recommendations
• To compare these observed care pathways with the theoretical clinical pathways derived from the clinical practice guidelines
• To assess if the adherence to clinical guidelines influence on important health outcomes, such as cardiovascular hospitalizations.
• To compare the traditional analytical methods with process mining methods in terms of modeling quality, prediction performance and information provided.

Study Design: It is a population-based retrospective observational study centered on all T2D patients diagnosed in five Regional Health Services within the Spanish National Health Service. We will include all the contacts of these patients with the health services using the electronic medical record systems including Primary Care data, Specialized Care data, Hospitalizations, Urgent Care data, Pharmacy Claims, and also other registers such as the mortality and the population register.

Cohort definition: All patients with code of Type 2 Diabetes in the clinical health records

• Inclusion criteria: patients that, at 01/01/2017 or during the follow-up from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2022 had active health card (active TIS - tarjeta sanitaria activa) and code of type 2 diabetes (T2D, DM2 in spanish) in the clinical records of primary care (CIAP2 T90 in case of using CIAP code system)
• Exclusion criteria:
  • patients with no contact with the health system from 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2022
  • patients that had a T1D (DM1) code opened after the T2D code during the follow-up.
• Study period. From 01/01/2017 to 31/12/2022

Files included in this publication:

• Datamodel_CONCEPT_DM2_diagram.png
• Common data model specification (Datamodel_CONCEPT_DM2_v.0.1.0.xlsx)
• Synthetic datasets (Datamodel_CONCEPT_DM2_sample_data)
  • sample_data1_dm_patient.csv
  • sample_data2_dm_param.csv
  • sample_data3_dm_patient.csv
  • sample_data4_dm_param.csv
  • sample_data5_dm_patient.csv
  • sample_data6_dm_param.csv
  • sample_data7_dm_param.csv
  • sample_data8_dm_param.csv
• Datamodel_CONCEPT_DM2_explanation.pptx

This dataset represents preliminary weekly hospital respiratory data and metrics aggregated to national and state/territory levels reported to CDC’s National Health Safety Network (NHSN) beginning August 2020. This dataset updates weekly on Wednesdays with preliminary data reported to NHSN for the previous reporting week (Sunday – Saturday).

Data for reporting dates through April 30, 2024 represent data reported during a previous mandated reporting period as specified by the HHS Secretary. Data for reporting dates May 1, 2024 – October 31, 2024 represent voluntarily reported data in the absence of a mandate. Data for reporting dates beginning November 1, 2024 represent data reported during a current mandated reporting period. All data and metrics capturing information on respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were voluntarily reported until November 1, 2024. All data included in this dataset represent aggregated counts, and include metrics capturing information specific to hospital capacity, occupancy, hospitalizations, and new hospital admissions with corresponding metrics indicating reporting coverage for a given reporting week. NHSN monitors national and local trends in healthcare system stress and capacity for all acute care and critical access hospitals in the United States.

For more information on the reporting mandate per the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requirements, visit: Updates to the Condition of Participation (CoP) Requirements for Hospitals and Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) To Report Acute Respiratory Illnesses.

For more information regarding NHSN’s collection of these data, including full reporting guidance, visit: NHSN Hospital Respiratory Data.

For data that is considered final for a given reporting week (Sunday – Saturday), and reflects that which is used in NHSN HRD dashboards for publication each Friday, visit: https://data.cdc.gov/Public-Health-Surveillance/Weekly-Hospital-Respiratory-Data-HRD-Metrics-by-Ju/ua7e-t2fy/about_data.

CDC coordinates weekly forecasts of hospitalization admissions based on this data set. More information about flu forecasting can be found at About Flu Forecasting | FluSight | CDC, and information about COVID-19 forecasting and other modeling analyses for the Respiratory Virus Season are available at CFA's Insights for Respiratory Virus Season | CFA | CDC.

Source: CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN).

• Data source description (updated November 15, 2024): As of October 9, 2024, Hospital Respiratory Data (HRD; formerly Respiratory Pathogen, Hospital Capacity, and Supply data or 'COVID-19 hospital data') are reported to HHS through CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) based on updated requirements from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). These data were voluntarily reported to NHSN May 1, 2024 until November 1, 2024, at which time CMS began requiring acute care and critical access hospitals to electronically report information via NHSN about COVID-19, influenza, and RSV, hospital bed census and capacity. Hospital bed capacity and occupancy data for all patients and for patients with COVID-19 or influenza for collection dates prior to May 1, 2024, represent data reported during a previously mandated reporting

Context

The Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS, often pronounced by its acronym as "hick picks") is a set of health care procedure codes based on the American Medical Association's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT).

HCPCS includes three levels of codes: Level I consists of the American Medical Association's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and is numeric. Level II codes are alphanumeric and primarily include non-physician services such as ambulance services and prosthetic devices, and represent items and supplies and non-physician services, not covered by CPT-4 codes (Level I). Level III codes, also called local codes, were developed by state Medicaid agencies, Medicare contractors, and private insurers for use in specific programs and jurisdictions. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) instructed CMS to adopt a standard coding systems for reporting medical transactions. The use of Level III codes was discontinued on December 31, 2003, in order to adhere to consistent coding standards.

Content

Classification of procedures performed for patients is important for billing and reimbursement in healthcare. The primary classification system used in the United States is Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS), maintained by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). This system is divided into two levels: level I and level II.

Level I HCPCS codes classify services rendered by physicians. This system is based on Common Procedure Terminology (CPT), a coding system maintained by the American Medical Association (AMA). Level II codes, which are the focus of this public dataset, are used to identify products, supplies, and services not included in level I codes. The level II codes include items such as ambulance services, durable medical goods, prosthetics, orthotics and supplies used outside a physician’s office.

Given the ubiquity of administrative data in healthcare, HCPCS coding systems are also commonly used in areas of clinical research such as outcomes based research.

Update Frequency: Yearly

Fork this kernel to get started.

Acknowledgements

https://bigquery.cloud.google.com/table/bigquery-public-data:cms_codes.hcpcs

https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/public-data/hcpcs-level2

Dataset Source: Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This dataset is publicly available for anyone to use under the following terms provided by the Dataset Source - http://www.data.gov/privacy-policy#data_policy — and is provided "AS IS" without any warranty, express or implied, from Google. Google disclaims all liability for any damages, direct or indirect, resulting from the use of the dataset.

Banner Photo by @rawpixel from Unplash.

Inspiration

What are the descriptions for a set of HCPCS level II codes?

This MS Excel files contains datasets and codebooks for Fofanah BD et al's Operational Research paper on AMR in Sierra Leone, Year 2022.