Every executable definition, side-panel definition and catalogue entry, in three groups by the licence of its
source, with its threshold in our own words and the source it is cited to. All are drafts pending review; a definition shows as reviewed only when both a clinical and a coding
approval are recorded. Default set library_default_set@1.1.
Local criteria: site choices among published definitions and named local
variants of the side-panel definitions, each with a change record, two approvals and an outcome preview.
✓Core definitions: sources that are U.S. government
works (public domain) or openly licensed (CC BY, with attribution). The product stands on these.
31 executable, 4 side-panel, 3
kidney-check rules (their citations are re-sourced with their next version), 3 catalogue.
Setting: show extended capabilities on clinician screens
Current on clinician screens: Off (default)
When on, findings from extended definitions appear on the side panel and the per-note screen under their own heading, after the core
findings. Off or on, every check runs and replays the same, and the coder view shows both groups. The guided demo's four cases are unaffected.
Thresholds are stated in our own words. Verbatim text is kept only from U.S. government works and openly licensed (CC BY)
sources, with the attribution the licence asks for; copyrighted guidelines are cited by title, body and year, with a locator.
No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied. This is not legal advice: counsel should review before commercial release.
Cancer-treatment adverse-event grading scale (NCI CTCAE): off by default
CTCAE grades describe adverse events in people receiving cancer treatment, usually in trials; they are not diagnostic criteria, and several grades depend on the laboratory reference range or on clinical descriptors that are not encoded. Using them outside that setting is a local decision for the clinical reviewer.
Current: Off (default)
When on, grading entries are shown only as "another published definition gives …" or as values needing clinical judgement; they never
raise a "not stated" item.
CDI or coding staff can change this setting. A clinician account records clinical reviews; a coding or documentation account records coding reviews: switch the demo user.
41 of 41 in “Core definitions” shown · open an entry for its source, threshold and review.
Diabetes diagnostic thresholds and the confirmation rule (ADA Standards of Care 2026)ada2026_diabetes@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Diabetes mellitus
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
confirmation counting: two results, from different tests or one test repeated: fact only citation (ADA Standards of Care 2026, Table 2.1 (numbers and rule restated))
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: NIDDK page opened 2026-11-14 in the resourcing build: HbA1c 6.5% or above, fasting 126 mg/dL or above, 2-hour 200 mg/dL or above, random 200 mg/dL or above with symptoms; matches the categories.
Use here
default set (diabetes)
Edition
NIDDK page last reviewed July 2022 (same cut-offs as ADA Standards of Care 2026) (2022)
Second source
none opened · not found: The WHO diabetes fact sheet (dated 11 November 2026) states no numeric thresholds; the WHO 2006/2011 reports were not opened. No independent second source was opened.
Contested
no: ADA thresholds match long-standing WHO thresholds for A1C and FPG, but WHO's current text was not opened; the A1C criterion is less sensitive in some populations (ADA text).
Diabetes Tests & Diagnosis
ada2026_diabetes@1.0
In our words: Diabetes range: HbA1c 6.5% or higher, fasting glucose 126 mg/dL or higher, or 2-hour glucose 200 mg/dL or higher on a glucose tolerance test; two such results are needed (two different tests, or one test repeated). A random glucose of 200 mg/dL or higher counts on its own only with typical symptoms.
Usually, your doctor will use a second test to confirm you have diabetes.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (2022) · Section 'What test results tell me if I have diabetes or prediabetes?', table of test results · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026, American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee (2026), Tables 2.1 and 2.2 · link — earlier primary of this entry; numbers restated; text not reproduced (ADA: educational, non-commercial use; text and data mining need written permission)
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypoglycaemia level (ADA Standards of Care 2026)ada2026_hypoglycaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypoglycaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
level 2 (below 54 mg/dL, 3.0 mmol/L), the mmol/L values and level 3: fact only citation (ADA Standards of Care 2026, Table 6.4 (numbers restated))
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: NIDDK page opened 2026-11-14 in the resourcing build: lower than 70 mg/dL; matches level 1. The page gives no number for level 2.
Use here
default set (hypoglycaemia)
Edition
NIDDK page last reviewed July 2021 (level 1); ADA Standards of Care 2026 (level 2) (2021)
Second source
International Hypoglycaemia Study Group 2017 · partly agrees: Agrees on level 2 (<3.0 mmol/L, <54 mg/dL) and on level 3 being clinical; disagrees on level 1 at exactly 70 mg/dL ('3.9 mmol/l (70 mg/dl) or less').
Contested
yes: The International Hypoglycaemia Study Group (2017) sets level 1 at an alert value of 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) or lower, so exactly 70 counts, i.e. it includes exactly 70 mg/dL; ADA 2026 uses '<70'. CTCAE uses other cut-offs.
Low Blood Glucose (Hypoglycemia)
ada2026_hypoglycaemia@1.0
In our words: Low glucose: below 70 mg/dL is level 1; below 54 mg/dL is level 2 (ADA's number, restated); level 3 is a severe event in which the person needs help, whatever the glucose.
a blood glucose reading lower than 70 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (2021) · Section 'What is low blood glucose?' · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
6. Glycemic Goals, Hypoglycemia, and Hyperglycemic Crises: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026, American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee (2026), Table 6.4 · link — earlier primary of this entry; numbers restated; text not reproduced
Glucose concentrations of less than 3.0 mmol/l (54 mg/dl) should be reported in clinical trials, International Hypoglycaemia Study Group (2017) · link — numbers restated; text not reproduced
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Prediabetes ranges (ADA Standards of Care 2026)ada2026_prediabetes@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Prediabetes
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: NIDDK page opened 2026-11-14 in the resourcing build: HbA1c 5.7% to 6.4%, fasting 100 to 125 mg/dL, 2-hour 140 to 199 mg/dL; matches the categories.
Use here
default set (prediabetes)
Edition
NIDDK page last reviewed July 2022 (same ranges as ADA Standards of Care 2026) (2022)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent second source was opened.
Contested
yes: Other bodies (for example WHO) are understood to use a different impaired fasting glucose range and not to use an A1C prediabetes range; those texts were not opened, so no other thresholds are recorded. Review item.
Diabetes Tests & Diagnosis
ada2026_prediabetes@1.0
In our words: Intermediate range: HbA1c 5.7% to 6.4%, fasting glucose 100 to 125 mg/dL, or 2-hour glucose 140 to 199 mg/dL.
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (2022) · Section 'What test results tell me if I have diabetes or prediabetes?', table of test results · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026, American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee (2026), Tables 2.1 and 2.2 · link — earlier primary of this entry; numbers restated; text not reproduced (ADA: educational, non-commercial use; text and data mining need written permission)
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Low HDL cholesterol (NCEP ATP III, 2001)atp3_hdl@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Low HDL cholesterol
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
not run by default: Only a superseded edition (2001) is encoded and no current edition was opened; not run by default.
Edition
ATP III (May 2001) (2001) (a newer edition exists)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent second source was opened.
Contested
yes: Sex-specific HDL thresholds are used in other ATP III criteria (metabolic syndrome) and by other bodies; not encoded.
Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) Executive Summary
atp3_hdl@1.0
In our words: HDL cholesterol below 40 mg/dL is low; 60 mg/dL or higher is high (adults 20 and over).
HDL Cholesterol <40 Low; ≥60 High
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Cholesterol Education Program (NIH Publication No. 01-3670) (2001) · Table 2 (PDF page 13) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
LDL cholesterol classification (NCEP ATP III, 2001)atp3_ldl@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypercholesterolaemia (LDL)
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
not run by default: Federal (public-domain) LDL classification. Candidate replacement for the retired LDL primary; not run by default until a clinician decides whether 130 to 189 mg/dL should count as present (the file marks borderline high and high as present).
Edition
ATP III (May 2001) (2001) (a newer edition exists)
Second source
American Heart Association / American College of Cardiology and partner societies 2018 · partly agrees: The 2018 guideline agrees on the 190 mg/dL boundary and lists LDL-C 160-189 mg/dL as a risk-enhancing factor; it has no 'optimal'/'borderline' classes.
Contested
no: Classification of an older edition; the 2018 guideline uses LDL ≥190 mg/dL for severe hypercholesterolaemia, agreeing at that boundary.
Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) Executive Summary
atp3_ldl@1.0
In our words: LDL cholesterol (mg/dL, adults 20 and over): below 100 optimal; 100 to 129 near or above optimal; 130 to 159 borderline high; 160 to 189 high; 190 or higher very high.
LDL Cholesterol <100 Optimal; 100-129 Near optimal/above optimal; 130-159 Borderline high; 160-189 High; ≥190 Very high
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Cholesterol Education Program (NIH Publication No. 01-3670) (2001) · Table 2 (PDF page 13) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
2018 Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol, AHA/ACC and partner societies (2018) · link — same 190 mg/dL boundary; numbers restated; text not reproduced
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Total cholesterol classification (NCEP ATP III, 2001)atp3_total_cholesterol@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypercholesterolaemia (total)
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
not run by default: Only a superseded edition (2001) is encoded and no current edition was opened; not run by default.
Edition
ATP III (May 2001) (2001) (a newer edition exists)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent second source was opened.
Contested
no: Older edition; no current US classification of total cholesterol was opened.
Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) Executive Summary
atp3_total_cholesterol@1.0
In our words: Total cholesterol (mg/dL): below 200 desirable; 200 to 239 borderline high; 240 or higher high.
Total Cholesterol <200 Desirable; 200-239 Borderline high; ≥240 High
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Cholesterol Education Program (NIH Publication No. 01-3670) (2001) · Table 2 (PDF page 13) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Triglyceride classification (NCEP ATP III, 2001)atp3_triglycerides@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypertriglyceridaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
not run by default: Only a superseded edition (2001) is encoded and no current edition was opened; not run by default.
Edition
ATP III (May 2001) (2001) (a newer edition exists)
Second source
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) 2025 · partly agrees: Both start abnormal at 150 mg/dL; bands above differ.
Contested
yes: CTCAE grades triglycerides differently (500 mg/dL is CTCAE grade 2, ATP III very high); the 2018 guideline's moderate/severe hypertriglyceridaemia definitions were not found in the opened text.
Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) Executive Summary
atp3_triglycerides@1.0
In our words: Triglycerides (mg/dL): below 150 normal; 150 to 199 borderline high; 200 to 499 high; 500 or higher very high.
Normal triglycerides: <150 mg/dL; Borderline-high triglycerides: 150-199 mg/dL; High triglycerides: 200-499 mg/dL; Very high triglycerides: ≥500 mg/dL
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Cholesterol Education Program (NIH Publication No. 01-3670) (2001) · Classification of serum triglycerides (PDF page 28) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Obesity / overweight / underweight
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
default set (bmi)
Edition
page dated March 19, 2024 (2024)
Second source
World Health Organization 2026 · agrees: WHO agrees on 25 and 30 for adults; WHO applies them from age 18, CDC from age 20; the WHO fact sheet does not give classes or underweight.
Contested
yes: BMI cut-offs are population-specific (WHO 2004 expert consultation proposed lower action points for Asian populations; not opened) and BMI does not measure adiposity directly; the CDC page applies the categories 'regardless of age, sex, or race' for adults.
Adult BMI Categories
cdc_adult_bmi@1.0
In our words: Adult body-mass index: under 18.5 underweight; 18.5 to under 25 healthy; 25 to under 30 overweight; 30 to under 35 obesity class 1; 35 to under 40 class 2; 40 or higher class 3.
Underweight: Less than 18.5; Healthy Weight: 18.5 to less than 25; Overweight: 25 to less than 30; Obesity: 30 or greater; Class 1 Obesity: 30 to less than 35; Class 2 Obesity: 35 to less than 40; Class 3 Obesity (Severe Obesity): 40 or greater
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2024) · Adult BMI categories table · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
Obesity and overweight (fact sheet), World Health Organization (2026) · link — same 25 and 30 cut-offs; WHO publications are CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; text not reproduced
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Acidosis grade by blood pH (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_acidosis@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Acidaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_acidosis@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 3 (pH <7.3); Grade 1 (pH below normal but ≥7.3); At or above the laboratory lower limit
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 174, term 'Acidosis' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Alkalosis grade by blood pH (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_alkalosis@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Alkalaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_alkalosis@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 3 (pH >7.5); Grade 1 (pH above normal but ≤7.5); At or below the laboratory upper limit
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 174, term 'Alkalosis' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Anaemia grade by haemoglobin (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_anaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Anaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
World Health Organization 2024 · disagrees: WHO 2024 defines anaemia with fixed population-specific cut-offs (for example <130 g/L men, <120 g/L non-pregnant women) and mild/moderate/severe bands; CTCAE uses the laboratory LLN and its own grades. Encoded separately as who2024_anaemia. CTCAE v5.0 (same body) has identical thresholds.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_anaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 4, term 'Anemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Blood bilirubin increased, grade, baseline normal (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hyperbilirubinaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hyperbilirubinaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hyperbilirubinaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4; Grade 3; Grade 2; Grade 1; At or below the laboratory ULN
>ULN - 1.5 x ULN if baseline was normal or less than normal (grade 1); >1.5 - 3.0 x ULN (grade 2); >3.0 - 10.0 x ULN (grade 3); >10.0 x ULN if baseline was normal or less than normal (grade 4)
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 164, term 'Blood bilirubin increased' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypercalcaemia grade by corrected serum calcium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypercalcaemia_corrected@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypercalcaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypercalcaemia_corrected@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or below the laboratory ULN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 176, term 'Hypercalcemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypercalcaemia grade by ionised calcium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypercalcaemia_ionised@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypercalcaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypercalcaemia_ionised@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or below the laboratory ULN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 176, term 'Hypercalcemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hyperkalaemia grade by serum potassium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hyperkalaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hyperkalaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
UK Kidney Association 2026 · disagrees: UKKA bands (mild 5.5-5.9, moderate 6.0-6.4, severe ≥6.5) do not line up with CTCAE grades (>5.5-6.0, >6.0-7.0, >7.0); a value of exactly 5.5 is CTCAE grade 1 but UKKA mild. Encoded separately as ukka2026_hyperkalaemia. CTCAE v5.0 has identical thresholds.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hyperkalaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or below the laboratory ULN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 177, term 'Hyperkalemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypermagnesaemia grade by serum magnesium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypermagnesaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypermagnesaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypermagnesaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or below the laboratory ULN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 177, term 'Hypermagnesemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypernatraemia grade by serum sodium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypernatraemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypernatraemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypernatraemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or below the laboratory ULN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 177, term 'Hypernatremia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypertriglyceridaemia grade (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypertriglyceridaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypertriglyceridaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NIH Publication No. 01-3670) 2001 · partly agrees: Both start abnormal at 150 mg/dL and both use 500 mg/dL as a boundary, but ATP III puts 500 in 'very high' while CTCAE puts 500 in grade 2 (>300-500). Encoded separately as atp3_triglycerides.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypertriglyceridaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4; Grade 3; Grade 2; Grade 1; Below 150 mg/dL (no grade)
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 178, term 'Hypertriglyceridemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypoalbuminaemia grade by serum albumin (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypoalbuminaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypoalbuminaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypoalbuminaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 179, term 'Hypoalbuminemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypocalcaemia grade by corrected serum calcium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypocalcaemia_corrected@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypocalcaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypocalcaemia_corrected@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 179, term 'Hypocalcemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypocalcaemia grade by ionised calcium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypocalcaemia_ionised@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypocalcaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypocalcaemia_ionised@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 179, term 'Hypocalcemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypoglycaemia grade by glucose (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypoglycaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypoglycaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee 2026 · disagrees: ADA levels (level 1 <70 and ≥54 mg/dL, level 2 <54 mg/dL) differ from CTCAE grades (grade 2 begins below 55 mg/dL). Encoded separately as ada2026_hypoglycaemia.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypoglycaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 179, term 'Hypoglycemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypokalaemia grade by serum potassium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypokalaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypokalaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypokalaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (<LLN to 3.0 mmol/L, symptomatic or intervention indicated); Grade 1 (<LLN to 3.0 mmol/L, asymptomatic, no intervention indicated); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 180, term 'Hypokalemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hypomagnesaemia grade by serum magnesium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hypomagnesaemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypomagnesaemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hypomagnesaemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 180, term 'Hypomagnesemia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Hyponatraemia grade by serum sodium (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_hyponatraemia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hyponatraemia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, European Society of Endocrinology and European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERBP) 2014 · partly agrees: The ESE/ESICM/ERA-EDTA guideline fixes the threshold at <135 mmol/L; CTCAE uses the laboratory LLN (often 135). Their severity bands were not opened (encoded separately as ese2014_hyponatraemia, presence only). CTCAE v5.0 prints the same numbers as '125-129' and '120-124'.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_hyponatraemia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (120 to <125 mmol/L regardless of symptoms, or 125 to <130 mmol/L and symptomatic); Grade 2 (125 to <130 mmol/L and asymptomatic); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 180, term 'Hyponatremia' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
INR increased, grade, not on anticoagulation (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_inr_increased@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Elevated INR
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_inr_increased@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 3; Grade 2; Grade 1; 1.2 or below (no grade)
Grade 1: >1.2 - 1.5; >1 - 1.5 x baseline if on anticoagulation; monitoring only indicated. Grade 2: >1.5 - 2.5; >1.5 - 2.5 x baseline if on anticoagulation. Grade 3: >2.5; >2.5 x baseline if on anticoagulation; bleeding
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 169, term 'INR increased' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
White blood cell decreased, grade (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_leukopenia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Leukopenia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
none opened · not found: No independent body publishes these grades: CTCAE is the sole definer of its own grading scale. CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) was compared and gives the same numeric thresholds for this term.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_leukopenia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
Grade 1: <LLN - 3000/mm3; <LLN - 3.0 x 10^9/L. Grade 2: <3000 - 2000/mm3; <3.0 - 2.0 x 10^9/L. Grade 3: <2000 - 1000/mm3; <2.0 - 1.0 x 10^9/L. Grade 4: <1000/mm3; <1.0 x 10^9/L
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 173, term 'White blood cell decreased' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Neutrophil count decreased, grade (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_neutropenia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Neutropenia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) 2017 · disagrees: CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent) used different bands: grade 1 from the LLN to 1500/mm3 and grade 4 below 500/mm3. v6.0 moved every grade down one band. Encoded separately as ctcae5_neutropenia. No independent body grades neutropenia on this scale.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_neutropenia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4; Grade 3; Grade 2; Grade 1; 1500/mm3 or above (no CTCAE v6.0 grade)
Grade 1: <1500 - 1000/mm3; <1.5 - 1.0 x 10^9/L. Grade 2: <1000 - 500/mm3; <1.0 - 0.5 x 10^9/L. Grade 3: <500 - 100/mm3; <0.5 - 0.1 x 10^9/L. Grade 4: <100/mm3; <0.1 x 10^9/L
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 170, term 'Neutrophil count decreased' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Platelet count decreased, grade (CTCAE v6.0)ctcae6_thrombocytopenia@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Thrombocytopenia
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
optional setting (off by default)
Edition
v6.0 (2025)
Second source
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) 2017 · disagrees: CTCAE v5.0 (same body, not independent): grade 3 down to 25,000/mm3 and grade 4 below 25,000/mm3; v6.0 moved the grade 3/4 boundary to 10,000/mm3. Encoded separately as ctcae5_thrombocytopenia.
Contested
no: Grading scale of a single body; not a diagnostic definition. Other bodies define this condition with different numbers (see second source where one was opened).
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v6.0 (MedDRA 28.0)
ctcae6_thrombocytopenia@1.0
In our words: Cancer-treatment adverse-event grade, not a diagnosis. Grade 4 (by laboratory value); Grade 3 (by laboratory value); Grade 2 (by laboratory value); Grade 1 (by laboratory value); At or above the laboratory LLN
National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025) · PDF page 8, term 'Platelet count decreased' (published July 22, 2025) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Adult blood pressure categories: normal, elevated, stage 1, stage 2 (NHLBI, as in the 2017/2025 ACC/AHA guidelines)nhlbi_bp_categories@1.01U.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Hypertension
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened by the build that encoded this entry; the threshold matches the opened text.
Use here
default set (blood_pressure)
Edition
page last updated June 26, 2025 (2025)
Second source
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation (open-access commentary) 2026 · partly agrees: Confirms the hypertension threshold (130/80) only; the stage table itself was not in the opened commentary.
Contested
yes: European guidelines define hypertension at 140/90 (ESC 2024, encoded separately as esc2024_office_bp) while AHA/ACC use 130/80.
High Blood Pressure — Diagnosis
nhlbi_bp_categories@1.0
In our words: Adult blood pressure (mm Hg): normal below 120/80; elevated 120 to 129 systolic with diastolic below 80; stage 1 130 to 139 or 80 to 89; stage 2 140 or higher or 90 or higher; crisis range above 180 or above 120. Diagnosis needs readings at two or more separate visits.
Normal: Less than 120 systolic AND Less than 80 diastolic; Elevated: 120 to 129 AND Less than 80; Stage 1: 130 to 139 OR 80 to 89; Stage 2: 140 or higher OR 90 or higher; Hypertensive Crisis: Higher than 180 OR Higher than 120
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U.S. National Institutes of Health) (2025) · Blood pressure categories table · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
2025 AHA/ACC high blood pressure guideline, AHA/ACC and partner societies (2025) — not opened (HTTP 403); numbers taken from the NHLBI page
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension, European Society of Cardiology (2024) · link — differs (140/90); encoded separately as esc2024_office_bp
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Heart failure (EF category)
Tier
1
Licence
Open licence (CC BY)
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: PMC9254673 opened 2026-11-14 in the resourcing build: reduced 40% or lower, mildly reduced 41% to 49%, preserved 50% or higher, improved = baseline 40% or lower, rise of 10 points or more, second above 40%; matches the categories. CC BY 4.0 licence line read on the page.
Use here
default set (heart_failure_ef)
Edition
2021 universal definition (as restated in 2022) (2021) (a newer edition exists)
Second source
none opened · not found: The co-published Eur J Heart Fail 2021;23:352-380 abstract (PMID:33605000) states the same cut-offs but is the same document, not an independent source. The 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline abstract does not state them; its full text was not opened.
Contested
no: The same cut-offs appear in the co-published Eur J Heart Fail and J Card Fail versions; some guidelines describe HFmrEF differently in wording only (not opened).
Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure
uhf2021_hf_ef_category@1.0
In our words: Reduced ejection fraction: 40% or lower. Mildly reduced: 41% to 49%. Preserved: 50% or higher. Improved: an earlier ejection fraction of 40% or lower, a later one above 40%, and a rise of at least 10 points. Applies only once heart failure is diagnosed (2021 edition).
HFrEF, LVEF ≤ 40%; HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF), LVEF of 41%–to 49%; ... HFpEF, LVEF ≥ 50%; and HF with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF): baseline LVEF ≤ 40% with ≥10‐pt increase from baseline and second LVEF > 40%.
open licence: CC BY 4.0, attribution: Chandramouli C, Stewart S, Almahmeed W, Lam CSP. Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure. Clin Cardiol 2022;45(Suppl 1):S2-S12, doi:10.1002/clc.23842. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
Universal Definition and Classification of Heart Failure, HFSA, HFA-ESC and JHFS (J Card Fail 2021;27:387-413; Eur J Heart Fail 2021;23:352-380) (2021), Abstract · link — earlier primary of this entry; numbers restated; text not reproduced
Second Universal Definition of Heart Failure, AHA/ACC/ESC/WHF (Eur Heart J 2026;47:4357-74) (2026) — not opened; reported (secondary summary) to drop fixed cut-offs between reduced and preserved EF
Accelerating heart failure research, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (2022) · link — federal cross-check; uses below 40% (not 40% or lower) for reduced EF; not used for the bands
ICD-10-CM FY2027 tabular list (I50.2-, I50.3-), CDC/NCHS (2026), I50.2-, I50.3- · link — coding terms: reduced EF under systolic HF, preserved EF under diastolic HF; no index entry for mildly reduced or improved EF
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Heart failure acuity: indicators in the record (evidence only; acuity is a clinical judgement)front_hf_acuity_indicators@1.0evidence_onlyOpen licence (CC BY)Draft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Heart failure
Tier
evidence_only
Licence
Open licence (CC BY)
To confirm
To confirm with a clinician: the one-week weight comparison (a weight 5 to 9 days before the latest) and the 14-day window for documented symptoms are local conventions.
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened the editorial: decompensated heart failure is described as needing escalated care or rescue therapy; it gives no natriuretic peptide cut-off, so none is shown.
Use here
evidence only (not executed)
Edition
2026
The second universal definition of heart failure (2026). What's new?
front_hf_acuity_indicators@1.0
In our words: Acuity (acute, chronic, acute on chronic) is a clinical judgement. Documented symptoms, natriuretic peptide results, weights and intravenous diuretic orders are shown for review; no threshold is applied and no acuity is concluded.
Biegus J, Ponikowski P (ESC Heart Failure) (2026) · section on decompensated heart failure · source
open licence: CC BY 4.0, attribution: Biegus J, Ponikowski P. The second universal definition of heart failure (2026). What's new? ESC Heart Fail 2026;13(5):xvag240. doi:10.1093/eschf/xvag240. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution licence. No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
Second universal definition of heart failure, Walsh MN et al. (Eur Heart J) (2026) — consensus document, not opened; licence not checked
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Heart failure type by ejection fraction (four categories, 2021 universal definition as restated in 2022)front_hf_ef_type@1.0judgementOpen licence (CC BY)Draft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Heart failure
Tier
judgement
Licence
Open licence (CC BY)
To confirm
To confirm with a clinician: the boundary wording at exactly 40%. This file reads reduced as 40% or lower (the openly licensed source); the federal cross-check says below 40%. A reported 40% is shown as reduced.
To confirm with a clinician: the improved-category baseline rule. The baseline is the first earlier ejection fraction of 40% or lower on file and the comparison value is the latest; another reading (lowest earlier value, or the value just before the latest) can give a different answer.
To confirm with a clinician: whether the 2021 categories should stay the shown edition now that a 2026 edition reportedly drops fixed cut-offs between reduced and preserved.
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened the article page (section 1.3, New universal definition). Each threshold checked against the page: 40% or lower; 41% to 49%; 50% or higher; improved = baseline 40% or lower, a rise of at least 10 points and a second value above 40%. All four match this file's thresholds and boundary tests.
Use here
front condition (side panel options)
Edition
2022
Why not executable
The 2021 categories are shown as the 2021 edition. A 2026 second universal definition reportedly drops fixed cut-offs between reduced and preserved ejection fraction while keeping the improved category (summary of an openly licensed editorial; the consensus document itself was not opened). Clinical decision needed before release. A federal cross-check (NHLBI, 2022) describes reduced ejection fraction as below 40%, not 40% or lower: the boundary at exactly 40% differs between sources.
Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure
front_hf_ef_type@1.0
In our words: Reduced ejection fraction: 40% or lower. Mildly reduced: 41% to 49%. Preserved: 50% or higher. Improved: an earlier ejection fraction of 40% or lower, a later one above 40%, and a rise of at least 10 points. (2021 edition, as restated in an openly licensed 2022 paper.)
HFrEF, LVEF ≤ 40%
Chandramouli C, Stewart S, Almahmeed W, Lam CSP (Clinical Cardiology) (2022) · Section 1.3 'New universal definition' (classification by left ventricular ejection fraction) · source
open licence: CC BY 4.0, attribution: Chandramouli C, Stewart S, Almahmeed W, Lam CSP. Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure. Clin Cardiol 2022;45(Suppl 1):S2-S12. doi:10.1002/clc.23842. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
Universal definition and classification of heart failure, Bozkurt B et al. (J Card Fail / Eur J Heart Fail) (2021), classification by ejection fraction — society consensus (no open licence seen); numbers restated; text not reproduced
Second universal definition of heart failure, Walsh MN et al. (Eur Heart J) (2026) — newer edition, not opened; reportedly drops fixed cut-offs between reduced and preserved; numbers not used
Accelerating heart failure research, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (2022), description of reduced ejection fraction · link — federal cross-check only; describes reduced ejection fraction as below 40% (boundary at exactly 40% differs)
ICD-10-CM FY2027 tabular list and index, CDC National Center for Health Statistics (2026), I50.2-, I50.3- · link — coder reference only; no index entry for mildly reduced or improved ejection fraction
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Kidney disease stage wording by filtering rate, with the albumin-to-creatinine category (options for the clinician)front_kidney_stage_wording@1.0measurementU.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Chronic kidney disease
Tier
measurement
Licence
U.S. government work
filtering-rate stage bands (90, 60, 45, 30, 15) and the G3a/G3b split: fact only citation (KDIGO 2024 CKD guideline, Chapter 1 (cited by title; not opened in this build))
albumin-to-creatinine categories (A1 below 30, A2 30-299, A3 300 mg/g or above): fact only citation (KDIGO 2024 CKD guideline, Chapter 1 (cited by title; not opened in this build))
2021 creatinine equation: public domain (NIDDK, Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate: Adults (last reviewed May 2025; opened))
To confirm
To confirm with a clinician: three months is encoded as 90 days (the VA/DoD summary says 3 months or more).
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened the VA/DoD provider summary (Sidebar 6, PDF page 16): eGFR below 60 for 3 months or more, and albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30 mg/g or higher on two measurements 3 months or more apart; both match. Opened the NIDDK page: the 2021 equation and its coefficients match the kidney rule. The stage bands and albumin categories (KDIGO) were not opened in this build.
Use here
front condition (side panel options)
Edition
2025
VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Primary Care Management of Chronic Kidney Disease, Provider Summary (Version 5.0)
front_kidney_stage_wording@1.0
In our words: Kidney disease by filtering rate: below 60 on results at least 3 months apart; or urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30 mg/g or higher on two tests at least 3 months apart. Stage by filtering rate: G1 90 or above; G2 60-89; G3a 45-59; G3b 30-44; G4 15-29; G5 below 15 (G1 and G2 also need a marker of kidney damage). Albumin-to-creatinine category: A1 below 30, A2 30-299, A3 300 mg/g or above. The filtering rate is estimated with the 2021 race-free creatinine equation.
Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense (2025) · Sidebar 6 'Criteria for CKD' (PDF page 16; printed page 13 of 37). Do not use Sidebar 9 (a reproduced third-party figure) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
KDIGO 2024 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease, KDIGO (Kidney International) (2024), Chapter 1 — fact-only citation for the stage bands and albumin categories (CC BY-NC-ND per index metadata); numbers restated; text not reproduced
Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate: Adults, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (2025), 2021 CKD-EPI creatinine equation · link — U.S. government work; the equation used by the kidney check
ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY2027, CMS and NCHS (2026), Section I.C.14.a.1 — coder reference only
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Adult malnutrition: global consensus criteria (alternative definition; shown in the details, not executed)front_malnutrition_global_consensus@1.0alternativeOpen licence (CC BY)Draft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Malnutrition
Tier
alternative
Licence
Open licence (CC BY)
To confirm
To confirm with a clinician and the dietitian lead: whether this definition is shown at all to VA users, who were trained on the US consensus characteristics; it is shown only in the library and, with extended capabilities on, as another published definition in the card's details.
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: Opened Tables 3 and 4: weight loss over 5% within 6 months or over 10% beyond; intake 50% or less of requirement for over a week or any reduction for over 2 weeks; severe stage over 10% within 6 months or over 20% beyond, body-mass index below 18.5 under 70 or below 20 at 70 and over. All match the paraphrase.
Use here
alternative definition (shown, not executed)
Edition
2019
GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition: a consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community
front_malnutrition_global_consensus@1.0
In our words: Global consensus: at least one physical finding (weight loss over 5% in 6 months or over 10% over a longer period; low body-mass index; reduced muscle mass) and one cause (eating half or less of needs for over a week, or less than usual for over 2 weeks, or a condition affecting absorption; inflammation). Severe: weight loss over 10% in 6 months or over 20% over a longer period, or a body-mass index below 18.5 under age 70 or below 20 at 70 and over.
Cederholm T et al. (Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle) (2019) · Tables 3 and 4 · source
open licence: CC BY 4.0, attribution: Cederholm T et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition - A consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2019;10(1):207-217. doi:10.1002/jcsm.12383. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition, Cederholm T et al. (Clin Nutr; JPEN) (2019) — original publications; no open licence seen; not quoted
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Kidney function
Tier
measured
Licence
Kidney rule: re-sourcing pending
Source checked
not opened: re-sourcing pending
Use here
kidney check (side panel and per-note screen)
Edition
Inker et al., N Engl J Med 2021;385:1737-49 (2021 race-free eGFR equation)
Why not executable
primary equation for every eGFR on the screen
Inker LA, Eneanya ND, Coresh J, et al. New creatinine- and cystatin C-based equations to estimate GFR without race. N Engl J Med 2021;385:1737-49. Equation as restated by the National Kidney Foundation (CKD-EPI Creatinine Equation, 2021).
ckd_epi_2021@1.0
In our words: primary equation for every eGFR on the screen
· Inker et al., N Engl J Med 2021;385:1737-49 (2021 race-free eGFR equation) · source
cited as in the rule file; the permissive (U.S. government) sources for the same numbers are recorded in the catalogue entry kdigo_aki_ckd and arrive with the rule's next version. No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
GFR and albuminuria categories, and the 3-month persistence rulekdigo_ckd_2024@1.1measuredKidney rule: re-sourcing pendingDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Kidney function
Tier
measured
Licence
Kidney rule: re-sourcing pending
Source checked
not opened: re-sourcing pending
Use here
kidney check (side panel and per-note screen)
Edition
KDIGO 2024 CKD guideline (G/A categories, more than 3 months)
Why not executable
persistence phenotype and G/A category
Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease. Kidney Int 2024;105(4S):S117-S314. Definition: abnormality of kidney structure or function present for more than 3 months; GFR categories G1-G5; albuminuria categories A1-A3.
kdigo_ckd_2024@1.1
In our words: persistence phenotype and G/A category
cited as in the rule file; the permissive (U.S. government) sources for the same numbers are recorded in the catalogue entry kdigo_aki_ckd and arrive with the rule's next version. No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Creatinine-change criteria and staging, with four selectable baselineskdigo_aki_2012@1.1measuredKidney rule: re-sourcing pendingDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft)
Condition
Kidney function
Tier
measured
Licence
Kidney rule: re-sourcing pending
Source checked
not opened: re-sourcing pending
Use here
kidney check (side panel and per-note screen)
Edition
KDIGO 2012 AKI guideline, Rec 2.1.1-2.1.2 and Table 2
Why not executable
creatinine-change criteria; baseline is a user toggle
Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Acute Kidney Injury Work Group. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Kidney Injury. Kidney Int Suppl 2012;2:1-138. Recommendations 2.1.1-2.1.2 and Table 2 (staging). KDIGO does not define the baseline; the four baselines below are common choices in the literature and are shown side by side.
kdigo_aki_2012@1.1
In our words: creatinine-change criteria; baseline is a user toggle
cited as in the rule file; the permissive (U.S. government) sources for the same numbers are recorded in the catalogue entry kdigo_aki_ckd and arrive with the rule's next version. No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Malnutrition
Tier
2
Licence
Open licence (CC BY)
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: PMC6438340 opened 2026-11-14 in the resourcing build: Table 3, Table 4 and section 3.8 read; CC BY 4.0 licence line read. The intake criterion is at or below 50% (the earlier entry said 50%).
Use here
catalogue (not executable)
Edition
2019
Why not executable
Diagnosis needs at least one phenotypic and one etiologic criterion. Reduced muscle mass needs a validated body-composition method or examination, and the etiologic criteria (reduced intake or assimilation, inflammation from acute or chronic disease) are clinical judgements. GLIM also requires prior risk screening. Numbers alone cannot decide it.
GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition - A consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community
glim2019_malnutrition
In our words: GLIM: at least one physical finding (weight loss over 5% in 6 months or over 10% longer; low BMI; low muscle mass) and one cause (eating half or less of needs for over a week, or less for over 2 weeks; inflammation). Severe: weight loss over 10% in 6 months or over 20% longer, or BMI below 18.5 under 70 / below 20 at 70 and over.
>5% within past 6 months, or>10% beyond 6 months | <20 if <70 years, or <22 if >70 years | Asia: <18.5 if <70 years, or <20 if >70 years | ≤50% of ER >1 week, or any reduction for >2 weeks
Cederholm T et al., GLIM Core Leadership Committee and Working Group (J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2019;10(1):207-217, doi:10.1002/jcsm.12383) (2019) · Table 3 (phenotypic and etiologic criteria); Table 4 (severity); section 3.8 (diagnosis rule) · source
open licence: CC BY 4.0, attribution: Cederholm T et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition - A consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2019;10(1):207-217, doi:10.1002/jcsm.12383. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition, GLIM (Clin Nutr 2019;38:1-9; JPEN 2019) (2019) · link — original publications; no open licence per Europe PMC
GLIM five-year update, GLIM (2025) — summary only; not opened
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease (kidney rules)kdigo_aki_ckdcatalogueU.S. government workDraft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
AKI / CKD
Tier
1
Licence
U.S. government work
GFR bands G1 to G5 including the G3a/G3b split at 45: fact only citation (KDIGO 2024 CKD guideline (numbers restated))
albuminuria categories A1 to A3 (A3 at 300 mg/g or more): fact only citation (KDIGO 2012/2024 (numbers restated))
AKI stages 1 to 3: open licence (Mahmoud, Erwi, Alfageeh, Cureus 2026;18(5):e109927, Table 2 (CC BY 4.0), restating KDIGO 2012)
AKI boundary wording (at least 0.3 mg/dL; at least 1.5 times baseline): fact only citation (KDIGO 2012 AKI guideline, Rec 2.1.1 (numbers restated))
2021 creatinine eGFR equation: public domain (NIDDK, Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate: Adults (last reviewed May 2025))
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: VA/DoD Provider Summary PDF opened 2026-11-14 (Sidebars 2A, 4, 6 read; no copyright statement found); NIDDK equation page and Cureus Table 2 opened the same day. KDIGO texts not re-opened.
Use here
catalogue (not executable)
Edition
2025
Why not executable
Executable already, outside this library: apps/exactdx/rules/kidney (kdigo_aki_2012, kdigo_ckd_2024 with the CKD-EPI equations). Not duplicated here. The rule files keep their own citations until their next version; the permissive sources for them are recorded here and in docs/LIBRARY.md (front conditions).
VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Primary Care Management of Chronic Kidney Disease, Provider Summary
kdigo_aki_ckd
In our words: CKD: eGFR below 60, or urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30 mg/g or higher, on tests at least 3 months apart. eGFR from the 2021 race-free creatinine equation. AKI: creatinine up at least 0.3 mg/dL in 48 hours, or to at least 1.5 times baseline within 7 days, or low urine output for 6 hours.
Decreased eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (GFR categories G3a-G5) for ≥3 months | Albuminuria (UACR ≥30 mg/g) on at least two measurements separated by ≥3 months
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense (2025) · Sidebar 2A 'eGFR Calculation' (PDF p. 10); Sidebar 4 'Definition of AKI and AKD' (PDF p. 13); Sidebar 6 'Criteria for CKD' (PDF p. 16) · source
U.S. government work (public domain). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
KDIGO 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of CKD, KDIGO (Kidney Int 2024;105(4S):S117-S314) (2024), Chapter 1; GFR and albuminuria categories — numbers restated; text, tables and figures not reproduced (CC BY-NC-ND per Europe PMC metadata)
KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Kidney Injury, KDIGO (Kidney Int Suppl 2012;2:1-138) (2012), Rec 2.1.1; Table 2 — numbers restated; text not reproduced
Acute Kidney Injury in the Intensive Care Unit: Recent Advances, Mahmoud IF, Erwi SM, Alfageeh AM (Cureus 2026;18(5):e109927) (2026), Table 2 'Severity staging system for AKI' · link — open-licence (CC BY 4.0) restatement of the AKI stages; opened 2026-11-14
Estimating Glomerular Filtration Rate: Adults, NIDDK (2025), 2021 CKD-EPI Creatinine Equation · link — federal; equation opened 2026-11-14 (no CKD cut-offs on the page)
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.
Clinical review: none recorded yet.
Coding review: none recorded yet.
Heart failure acuity and stageuhf2021_hf_acuity_and_stagecatalogueOpen licence (CC BY)Draft · pending reviewdraft — pending clinical and coding review
Status
draft — pending clinical and coding review (draft — requires clinical and coding review)
Condition
Heart failure acuity
Tier
2
Licence
Open licence (CC BY)
Source checked
opened on 2026-11-14: PMC9254673 opened 2026-11-14: stages and trajectory terms read in sections 1.3 and 2.4.
Use here
catalogue (not executable)
Edition
2022
Why not executable
The universal definition's stages (at risk, pre-HF, HF, advanced HF) and acuity or trajectory (new onset, worsening, persistent, in remission) depend on symptoms, signs, structural disease and response to therapy. Only the EF category is numeric and is executable as uhf2021_hf_ef_category.
Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure
uhf2021_hf_acuity_and_stage
In our words: Stage (at risk, pre-HF, HF, advanced HF) and acuity are clinical judgements; the record values are shown for review.
at risk for HF, pre‐HF, HF, and advanced HF in place of the previous stages A–D
open licence: CC BY 4.0, attribution: Chandramouli C, Stewart S, Almahmeed W, Lam CSP. Clinical implications of the universal definition for the prevention and treatment of heart failure. Clin Cardiol 2022;45(Suppl 1):S2-S12, doi:10.1002/clc.23842. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). No endorsement by the cited bodies is implied.
See also:
The second universal definition of heart failure (2026). What's new?, Biegus J, Ponikowski P (ESC Heart Fail 2026;13(5):xvag240) (2026) · link — edition note: CC BY editorial; not opened in this build (captcha); reported to prefer 'decompensated HF' defined by escalated care
Universal Definition and Classification of Heart Failure, HFSA, HFA-ESC and JHFS (J Card Fail 2021;27:387-413) (2021) · link — earlier primary; text not reproduced
Review
Reviewed only when both a clinical review and a coding review are recorded as approved.