Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39724920›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025

CARE-SD: classifier-based analysis for recognizing provider stigmatizing and doubt marker labels in electronic health records: model development and validation.

Andrew Walker, Annie Thorne, Sudeshna Das, Jennifer Love, Hannah L F Cooper, Melvin Livingston, Abeed Sarker

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Understanding Stigmatizing Language Lexicons: A Comparative Analysis in Clinical Contexts.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A Hand to Hold.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Andrew WalkerDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4216-2396
Annie ThorneDepartment of Infectious Disease, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA 30329, United States.
Sudeshna DasDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2112-6986
Jennifer LoveDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, United States.
Hannah L F CooperDepartment of Behavioral, Social, Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.
Melvin LivingstonDepartment of Behavioral, Social, Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.
Abeed SarkerDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7358-544X

Funding

Mining Social Media Big Data for Toxicovigilance: Studying Substance Use via Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning MethodsR01DA057599 · NIDA · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Abeed H Sarker · 2022 to 2026
$2.2M
NIDANIDA NIH HHS R01 DA057599NIDA NIH HHS T32DA0505552NIH
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo detect and classify features of stigmatizing and biased language in intensive care electronic health records (EHRs) using natural language processing techniques. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe first created a lexicon and regular expression lists from literature-driven stem words for linguistic features of stigmatizing patient labels, doubt markers, and scare quotes within EHRs. The lexicon was further extended using Word2Vec and GPT 3.5, and refined through human evaluation. These lexicons were used to search for matches across 18 million sentences from the de-identified Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III (MIMIC-III) dataset. For each linguistic bias feature, 1000 sentence matches were sampled, labeled by expert clinical and public health annotators, and used to supervised learning classifiers.

resultsLexicon development from expanded literature stem-word lists resulted in a doubt marker lexicon containing 58 expressions, and a stigmatizing labels lexicon containing 127 expressions. Classifiers for doubt markers and stigmatizing labels had the highest performance, with macro F1-scores of 0.84 and 0.79, positive-label recall and precision values ranging from 0.71 to 0.86, and accuracies aligning closely with human annotator agreement (0.87). DISCUSSION: This study demonstrated the feasibility of supervised classifiers in automatically identifying stigmatizing labels and doubt markers in medical text and identified trends in stigmatizing language use in an EHR setting. Additional labeled data may help improve lower scare quote model performance.

conclusionsClassifiers developed in this study showed high model performance and can be applied to identify patterns and target interventions to reduce stigmatizing labels and doubt markers in healthcare systems.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingSocial StigmaStereotypingSupervised Machine LearningHumanselectronic health recordnatural language processingstigmatext classification

Identifiers

PMID39724920
PMCPMC11756621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.