ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Clinical genetic counselors' use of people- and identity-first language in regard to patients' identification with disability.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient Disability Status and the Use of Stigmatizing Language in Clinical Notes During Hospital Admission for Birth.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2025Article
- Disability, Genetic Counseling, and Medical Education: From Eugenics to Anti-Ableism.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2025Review
- Clinical genetic counselors' use of people- and identity-first language in regard to patients' identification with disability.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The language surrounding disabilities has evolved from derogatory terms to the adoption of people-first language. However, identity-first language is being advocated for by some within the disability community. Using the preferred terminology is crucial to demonstrate respect and prevent stigmatization, especially in healthcare settings like genetic counseling, where language can impact relationships with the community. However, the specific language practices of genetic counselors and their underlying reasons are unclear. This qualitative study explored the language practices employed by genetic counselors when interacting with individuals with disabilities. Fifteen interviews were conducted with genetic counselors who had clinical experience. Reflexive thematic analysis revealed that the perceptions and practices about language used with patients and disability communities overall varied, with overarching themes of people-first language is the preferred and default language, counselors mirror patient language with some exceptions, acknowledging the evolving nature of language, recognizing differences in language preferences, and reacting to outdated terminology. These findings show the importance of continuing education to stay abreast of preferred verbiage within communities and individual patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.