Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29374357›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2018

Do Words Matter? Stigmatizing Language and the Transmission of Bias in the Medical Record.

Anna P Goddu, Katie J O'Conor, Sophie Lanzkron, Mustapha O Saheed, Somnath Saha, Monica E Peek, Carlton Haywood, Mary Catherine Beach

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 152 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
152citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

152 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Understanding Stigmatizing Language Lexicons: A Comparative Analysis in Clinical Contexts.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Language matters: Guidance for person-centred diabetes communication in Ireland.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

92 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Anna P GodduJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. agoddu1@jhmi.edu.
Katie J O'ConorJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sophie LanzkronDivision of Hematology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mustapha O SaheedDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Somnath SahaSection of General Internal Medicine, VA Portland Health Care System, Portland, OR, USA.
Monica E PeekSection of General Internal Medicine, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Carlton HaywoodDivision of Hematology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mary Catherine BeachJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Respect, Trust, and Patient Outcomes in Sickle Cell DiseaseR01HL088511 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BEACH, MARY CATHERINE · 2009 to 2014
$3.9M
Communication Quality and Patient Outcomes in HIV/AIDS and Substance AbuseK24DA037804 · NIDA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BEACH, MARY CATHERINE · 2015 to 2019
$923k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL088511NIDA NIH HHS K24 DA037804
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinician bias contributes to healthcare disparities, and the language used to describe a patient may reflect that bias. Although medical records are an integral method of communicating about patients, no studies have evaluated patient records as a means of transmitting bias from one clinician to another.

objectiveTo assess whether stigmatizing language written in a patient medical record is associated with a subsequent physician-in-training's attitudes towards the patient and clinical decision-making.

designRandomized vignette study of two chart notes employing stigmatizing versus neutral language to describe the same hypothetical patient, a 28-year-old man with sickle cell disease.

participantsA total of 413 physicians-in-training: medical students and residents in internal and emergency medicine programs at an urban academic medical center (54% response rate). MAIN MEASURES: Attitudes towards the hypothetical patient using the previously validated Positive Attitudes towards Sickle Cell Patients Scale (range 7-35) and pain management decisions (residents only) using two multiple-choice questions (composite range 2-7 representing intensity of pain treatment). KEY

resultsExposure to the stigmatizing language note was associated with more negative attitudes towards the patient (20.6 stigmatizing vs. 25.6 neutral, p < 0.001). Furthermore, reading the stigmatizing language note was associated with less aggressive management of the patient's pain (5.56 stigmatizing vs. 6.22 neutral, p = 0.003).

conclusionsStigmatizing language used in medical records to describe patients can influence subsequent physicians-in-training in terms of their attitudes towards the patient and their medication prescribing behavior. This is an important and overlooked pathway by which bias can be propagated from one clinician to another. Attention to the language used in medical records may help to promote patient-centered care and to reduce healthcare disparities for stigmatized populations.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelStereotypingFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyLanguageMaleMedical RecordsStudents, Medicalbiasclinical decision-makingcommunicationdisparitieslanguagemedical recordstigma

Identifiers

PMID29374357
PMCPMC5910343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.