ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Large databases, such as the OneFlorida Clinical Research Consortium1, rely on ICD-10 diagnosis codes to identify patients with specificity. Patients enrolled in retrospective research studies are often collected via the use of ICD-10 diagnosis codes. These codes can be subject to error due to over- or under-diagnosing, which is especially true in diseases that are difficult to diagnose, such as chronic pancreatitis (CP). Symptoms of chronic pancreatitis can be vague and non-specific, particularly in the early stages of the disease. This study aimed to determine if ICD-10 diagnosis codes for CP are overutilized and to recognize alternative pathologies that likely lead to the ICD-10 diagnosis code for CP being placed. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted of all patients with ICD-10 codes K86.0 (alcohol-induced chronic pancreatitis) and K86.1 (other chronic pancreatitis) who were seen in either an outpatient or inpatient setting at a tertiary care center from February 2018 to February 2020. Data was extracted from the institution’s integrated electronic data repository. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). A total of 1,360 unique patient charts were reviewed, of which 176 carried ICD-10 code K86.0 and 1,184 carried ICD-10 code K86.1. The diagnosis of CP was defined as either being made by a gastroenterologist, proven by biopsy, or having classic findings of CP on cross-sectional imaging with appropriate symptoms. RESULTS A total of 504 (37%) out of the 1,360 patient charts did not have any evidence of chronic pancreatitis despite being labeled with an ICD-10 code for CP. When broken down by diagnosis code, 41 of 176 charts (23.3%) with K86.0 and 461 of 1,184 charts (38.6%) with K86.1 did not have any evidence of CP. Of these patients, 163 had a single episode of acute pancreatitis of any etiology, 107 had recurrent acute pancreatitis, 29 had an episode of acute necrotizing pancreatitis, 22 had cancer (pancreatic or cholangiocarcinoma), 19 had pancreatic resection without underlying CP, 48 had chronic abdominal pain of non-pancreaticobiliary etiology (IBS, IBD, gastritis, PUD, gastroparesis), and 81 had no identifiable abdominal pathology. CONCLUSIONS We found that even at a tertiary care center and a pancreatic center of excellence, many patients with no evidence of chronic pancreatitis were labeled at some point in their care with an ICD-10 diagnosis code for CP. The majority of these had an alternative pancreatic pathology however a significant number had no evidence of a pancreaticobiliary pathology. Although the OneFlorida database makes multicenter research more accessible, it does not replace labor-intensive chart review for CP given the propensity for over-diagnosis.