Perinatal Substance Use and the Documentation of Stigmatizing Language in Clinical Notes.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Nursing Research Pub Date : 2026-07-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-20 DOI:10.1097/NNR.0000000000000907
Sarah E Harkins, Ismael Ibrahim Hulchafo, Arielle K Hazi, Jihye Kim Scroggins, Marianne Sharko, Maxim Topaz, Veronica Barcelona
{"title":"Perinatal Substance Use and the Documentation of Stigmatizing Language in Clinical Notes.","authors":"Sarah E Harkins, Ismael Ibrahim Hulchafo, Arielle K Hazi, Jihye Kim Scroggins, Marianne Sharko, Maxim Topaz, Veronica Barcelona","doi":"10.1097/NNR.0000000000000907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with substance use disorders (SUD) experience bias from clinicians when receiving pregnancy care. Stigmatizing language documented in electronic health records is a marker of clinician bias and it can reinforce inequitable care practices.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between substance use and stigmatizing language documented in clinical notes from the birth hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional study of electronic health record data from patients 20 weeks of gestation admitted to labor and birth at two urban hospitals between 2017 and 2019 ( N =19,094). We identified patients with SUD through ICD-10 codes and natural language processing (NLP)-based keyword searches. We employed an NLP algorithm to identify four categories of stigmatizing language in clinical narratives. We conducted multivariable logistic regression and calculated adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for each stigmatizing language category.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Approximately 1.5% of patients had a documented SUD. Patients with SUD had higher odds of any stigmatizing language compared with patients without SUD. Patients with SUD also had higher odds of language representing marginalized language/identities and difficult patient categories. There were no significant differences in the unilateral/authoritarian language category between patients with and without SUD.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Patients with SUD were more likely to have stigmatizing language documented by clinicians during labor and birth. Findings underscore the need for clinician training on person-centered language and the implementation of abolitionist approaches to reduce the stigmatization of patients with SUD.</p>","PeriodicalId":49723,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Research","volume":" ","pages":"249-257"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NNR.0000000000000907","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with substance use disorders (SUD) experience bias from clinicians when receiving pregnancy care. Stigmatizing language documented in electronic health records is a marker of clinician bias and it can reinforce inequitable care practices.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between substance use and stigmatizing language documented in clinical notes from the birth hospitalization.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of electronic health record data from patients 20 weeks of gestation admitted to labor and birth at two urban hospitals between 2017 and 2019 ( N =19,094). We identified patients with SUD through ICD-10 codes and natural language processing (NLP)-based keyword searches. We employed an NLP algorithm to identify four categories of stigmatizing language in clinical narratives. We conducted multivariable logistic regression and calculated adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for each stigmatizing language category.

Results: Approximately 1.5% of patients had a documented SUD. Patients with SUD had higher odds of any stigmatizing language compared with patients without SUD. Patients with SUD also had higher odds of language representing marginalized language/identities and difficult patient categories. There were no significant differences in the unilateral/authoritarian language category between patients with and without SUD.

Discussion: Patients with SUD were more likely to have stigmatizing language documented by clinicians during labor and birth. Findings underscore the need for clinician training on person-centered language and the implementation of abolitionist approaches to reduce the stigmatization of patients with SUD.

围产期药物使用与临床记录中污名化语言的记录。
背景:物质使用障碍(SUD)患者在接受妊娠护理时受到临床医生的偏倚。电子健康记录中记录的污名化语言是临床医生偏见的标志,它可以加强不公平的护理做法。目的:本研究的目的是检查从出生住院的临床记录中记录的物质使用和污名化语言之间的关系。方法:这是一项横断面研究,对2017-2019年间两家城市医院分娩和分娩的妊娠20周患者的电子健康记录数据进行研究(N= 19094)。我们通过ICD-10代码和基于自然语言处理(NLP)的关键词搜索来识别SUD患者。我们采用了一种NLP算法来识别临床叙述中的四种污名化语言。我们进行了多变量逻辑回归,并计算了每个污名化语言类别的校正优势比和95%置信区间。结果:大约1.5%的患者有记录在案的SUD。与未患SUD的患者相比,患有SUD的患者使用侮辱性语言的几率更高。患有SUD的患者也有更高的几率使用代表边缘化语言/身份和困难患者类别的语言。有和没有SUD的患者在单侧/权威性语言类别上没有显著差异。讨论:患有SUD的患者更有可能在分娩和分娩期间有临床医生记录的污名化语言。研究结果强调需要对临床医生进行以人为本的语言培训,并实施废除主义方法来减少对SUD患者的污名化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nursing Research
Nursing Research 医学-护理
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
102
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Research is a peer-reviewed journal celebrating over 60 years as the most sought-after nursing resource; it offers more depth, more detail, and more of what today''s nurses demand. Nursing Research covers key issues, including health promotion, human responses to illness, acute care nursing research, symptom management, cost-effectiveness, vulnerable populations, health services, and community-based nursing studies. Each issue highlights the latest research techniques, quantitative and qualitative studies, and new state-of-the-art methodological strategies, including information not yet found in textbooks. Expert commentaries and briefs are also included. In addition to 6 issues per year, Nursing Research from time to time publishes supplemental content not found anywhere else.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书