PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 23, 2025Home Health Care Management & Practice0 citationsOpen Access

Beyond Keywords: A Qualitative Study of Context-Dependent Stigmatizing Language in Clinical Documentation From a Large, Multi-Payer Home Healthcare Agency

View Full Paper
ZZZhihong ZhangSPStephanie Potts‐ThompsonLPLaura Prescott

Key Points

  • Clinicians perceive stigmatizing language differently based on the context, affecting patient trust and care collaboration.
  • Interviews with 7 nurses revealed key themes about documentation practices shaped by system-level pressures and complex patient needs.
  • Thematic analysis identified strategies like reflective documentation and education to reduce bias in clinical language use.
  • Findings advocate for context-sensitive NLP tools and training to enhance equitable documentation practices in healthcare.

Abstract

Background: Stigmatizing language in clinical documentation is increasingly recognized as a contributor to healthcare disparities, with evidence that such language disproportionately affects marginalized populations. Objective: This study aimed to explore home healthcare (HHC) clinicians’ perceptions of stigmatizing language in documentation and to identify strategies for reducing bias. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 7 nurses between May and October 2024 from a large nonprofit HHC agency in New York City, which serves patients across diverse payer types, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. We used maximum variation sampling to ensure diversity in race, experience, and geography. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach to identify clinicians’ views on stigmatizing terms, contextual influences, and strategies for bias reduction. Results: Five themes emerged. First, clinicians demonstrated varied interpretations of potentially stigmatizing language, emphasizing the role of context in how terms are perceived. Second, clinical and system-level factors, such as complex patient needs, time pressures, and regulatory demands, shape documentation practices. Third, stigmatizing language can influence provider attitudes, erode patient trust, and hinder patient-clinician care collaboration. Fourth, clinicians identified both individual and organizational strategies to reduce bias, including reflective documentation practices and formal education and training to increase language awareness. Fifth, participants highlighted the potential role of technology in reducing biased documentation. Conclusions: This study highlights the complexity of identifying stigmatizing language in HHC and the importance of contextual understanding. Findings support the development of clinician-informed, context-sensitive NLP tools and training programs to promote equitable, patient-centered documentation practices.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhang et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d473ad31b076d99fa6c1fbhttps://doi.org/10.1177/10848223251367385
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper