ArticleJMIR medical informatics2026
Semantic Similarity Search Approach to Extract Exemplars of Stigmatizing and Positive Language in Obstetric Clinical Notes: Exploratory Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2026. 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: Natural language processing can extract meaningful information from clinical notes. However, human annotation is time-consuming and costly, and scarce data poses a challenge. Objective: This study aimed to explore a semantic similarity search approach to extract exemplars of stigmatizing and positive language in obstetric clinical notes. Methods: We used electronic health record data from labor and birth admissions at 2 hospitals in the United States from 2017 to 2019. We used a semantic similarity search approach, which used 200 randomly selected true exemplars, stratified by language categories, as queries to search for similar exemplar candidates. We extracted the top 5 candidates with the highest cosine similarities, which were assessed for accuracy. Results: We retrieved 1000 candidates. An average precision of 0.69 was achieved when candidates with cosine similarity thresholds of 0.75 or higher were included, at which point 68.8% (64/93) of exemplar candidates accurately represented true cases. At the 0.75 threshold, the proportion of true cases was higher for preferred language (41/56, 73.2%) and unilateral/authoritarian decisions (5/7, 71.4%). The proportion of true cases was lower for difficult patients (2/7, 28.6%) and marginalized identities (3/9, 33.3%). Conclusions: The semantic similarity search approach shows promise in efficiently extracting exemplars while reducing the annotation burden, laying the groundwork for future applications in other domains.
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.