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.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Understanding Stigmatizing Language Lexicons: A Comparative Analysis in Clinical Contexts.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- A Hand to Hold.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Large Language Models in Critical Care Medicine: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Beyond Keywords: A Qualitative Study of Context-Dependent Stigmatizing Language in Clinical Documentation from a Large, Multi-Payer Home Healthcare Agency.Home health care management & practice · 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
7 authors.
Funding
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
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.