Talk:Review of systems

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The recently added (Oct 2019) content in the Relation to History section is sub-standard. Can someone with more experience than me either edit it into better shape or revert those changes?

I will see what I can do with bringing this up to standard--it lacks references and those that are there (CMS 2011) are hopelessly out-of-date. Welcome any input, esp. editorial review, corrections, discussion, etc.

CMS Changed the regulation in 2021-2022. This doesn't change what the ROS needs to do, but they did away with (for outpatient visits, at least) the byzantine accounting system in CPT5 where you needed so many of this column, and how many from the next, etc. etc. until you bled from the eyes...

Each symptom is going to need a link to a DDx, as well as making sure there is a proper SNOMED-CT code for it so people can actually use this information. Similarly, there needs to be the correct LOINC and SNOMED-CT codes for the sections. (Not every Anglophone country uses LOINC, e.g. I believe that the U.K. doesn't).

Kevin DrKC MD (talk) 17:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]