Background: The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores have been used to evaluate Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) severity in clinical settings. Through the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Code (ICD-10), documentation of NIHSS scores has been made possible for administrative purposes and has since been increasingly adopted in insurance claims. Per CMS guidelines, the stroke ICD-10 diagnosis code must be documented by the treating physician, but ICD-10 NIHSS scores can be documented by any healthcare provider involved in the patient's care. Accuracy of the administratively collected NIHSS compared to expert clinical evaluation as documented in the Paul Coverdell registry is however still uncertain. Methods: Leveraging a linked dataset comprised of the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Program (PCNASP) clinical registry and probabilistically matched individuals on Medicare Claims data, we sampled patients aged 65 and above admitted for AIS across nine states, from 2016 to 2019. We excluded those lacking documentation for either clinical or ICD-10 based NIHSS scores. We then examined score concordance from both databases and measured discordance as the absolute difference between the PCNASP and ICD-10-based NIHSS scores. Results: Among 66,837 matched patients, mean NIHSS scores for PCNASP and Medicare ICD-10 were 7.26 (95% CI: 7.20 - 7.32) and 7.40 (95% CI: 7.34 - 7.46), respectively. Concordance between the two scores was high as indicated by an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.93. Conclusion: The high concordance between clinical and ICD-10 NIHSS scores highlights the latter's potential as measure of stroke severity derived from structured claims data.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study was funded by the NIH (1R01AG073410-01)

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Our study adhered to the ethical guidelines outlined by the Massachusetts General Hospital Institutional Review Board (IRB) and obtained IRB approval under the protocol number 2020P003963

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Data are not available for public use