ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
Using natural language processing to explore differences in healthcare professionals' language on Functional Neurological Disorder: a comparative topic and sentiment analysis study.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effective communication is essential for delivering quality healthcare, particularly for individuals with Functional Neurological Disorders (FND), who are often subject to misdiagnosis and stigmatising language that implies symptom fabrication. Variability in communication styles among healthcare professionals may contribute to these challenges, affecting patient understanding and care outcomes. Methods: This study employed natural language processing (NLP) to analyse clinician-to-clinician and clinician-to-patient communication regarding FND. A total of 869 electronic health records (EHRs) were examined to assess differences in language use and emotional tone across various professionals-specifically, neurologists and psychologists-and different document types, such as discharge summaries and letters to general practitioners (GPs). Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modelling and two complementary sentiment models (VADER and Flair) were applied to the corpus. Sentiment analysis was also applied to evaluate the emotional tone of communications. Results: Findings revealed distinct communication patterns between neurologists and psychologists. Psychologists frequently used terms related to subjective experiences, such as "trauma" and "awareness," aiming to help patients understand their diagnosis. In contrast, neurologists focused on medicalised narratives, emphasising symptoms like "seizures" and clinical interventions, including assessment ("telemetry") and treatment ("medication"). Sentiment analysis indicated that psychologists tended to use more positive and proactive language, whereas neurologists generally adopted a neutral or cautious tone. Conclusions: These findings highlight differences in communication styles and emotional tones among professionals involved in FND care. The study underscores the importance of fostering integrated, multidisciplinary care pathways and developing standardised guidelines for clinical terminology in FND to improve communication and patient outcomes. Future research should explore how these communication patterns influence patient experiences and treatment adherence.
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.