Update UI to display the extra rubric information for ICD-10 codes

[rw251]

In the new model for ICD-10 we now capture additional information for each code - called "rubrics". Rubrics fall into different types e.g. "inclusion" for equivalent terms/conditions included under the code, "exclusion" for things that aren't here and coded elsewhere, "coding-hint" for hints to help coders code etc.

Now that we store this information we should plan how we will present this to users.

• Decide which rubric types to display
• Decide how to display each type
• Decide which rubric types to treat as synonyms during search
• Update the UI

[rw251]

The possible values are: inclusion, exclusion, definition, text, note, coding_hint, footnote, introduction, and modifier_link.

We should ignore "modifier_link" (things like [See site code at the beginning of this chapter]) as we're processing these modifiers and creating new codes so this is redundant, and likely confusing, information.

We can also ignore the "introduction" rubrics. These only occur at the start of chapters and are quite long. It's likely redundant information, would be a lot of duplication of the existing ICD-10 browsers, and doesn't have an obvious place to put it in the existing interface.

For the others...

1. The most frequent rubrics are "inclusion" and "exclusion". We can display these as bullet lists under appropriate headings:

---

2. Three rubrics are essentially a longer description, or note to the coder. We can display these immediately below the code description, and above the include/exclude lists

2a. "definition" - here it's "A disorder of persistant..."

2b. "text" - here it's "Use additional code..."

2c. "note" - here it's "If T-cell lineage..."

3. "coding_hint"

4. there is a single "footnote" rubric for small pox

[Jongmassey]

Two questions:

• should we include parent rubrics in the more info modal for a code?
• how far up the tree should we include (parent category, block(s), chapter)?

Some chapter-level inclusion/exclusion rubrics may be pertinent to users e.g. XVI, but may just be confusing noise in other cases.

If we do not include parent rubrics, how do I know (as a user) that I should check the "more info" modals for the parent items for important information?

[rw251]

For some of the info, in particular "text" and "note" - sometimes it looks like useful information, and other times it's a message to a clinical coder and is likely confusing. But there's no way to distinguish based on rubric kind. So perhaps we add some help text like:

The following is extra information provided by the WHO for this code. It is primarily targeted at clinical coders, but may be useful and so included for completeness.

[rw251]

The above mock-ups but now:

• better styling
• includes the text explaining that the info is for coders but might be useful
• final image shows how the modifier rubrics are partitioned from the concept rubrics

[rw251]

should we include parent rubrics in the more info modal for a code?
how far up the tree should we include (parent category, block(s), chapter)?

A mock up where we include all the rubrics from the ancestors. Deliberately picked to be a wordy one, but there are plenty of ones similar. I've asked here to see what people think: