Emoji in clinical messaging: results of a focus group study.

IF 4.7 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JAMIA Open Pub Date : 2026-08-05 eCollection Date: 2026-08-01 DOI:10.1093/jamiaopen/ooag159
Colin M E Halverson, Haley Echols, Lauren Kang, Samantha Vershaw, Joy L Lee
{"title":"Emoji in clinical messaging: results of a focus group study.","authors":"Colin M E Halverson, Haley Echols, Lauren Kang, Samantha Vershaw, Joy L Lee","doi":"10.1093/jamiaopen/ooag159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinicians are increasingly using emoji in digital communication, but limited qualitative work has examined how they assess the appropriateness, risks, and benefits of this practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize clinicians' reported utilization of and attitudes toward emoji in clinical messaging.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Qualitative study using focus groups and a survey from August to October 2025.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Twenty-nine clinicians at a large academic health system were recruited from 4 specialties and included physicians and advanced practice providers, genetic counselors, medical students, and other healthcare workers.</p><p><strong>Approach: </strong>Rapid qualitative analysis was used to identify both the benefits and drawbacks of emoji use in clinical messaging.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>Emoji were seen as clarifying tone, building rapport, softening directives, and reducing notification fatigue. However, participants also reported concerns about ambiguity, informality, and potential medicolegal risk due to messages' discoverability. Their assessment of appropriateness was context-dependent, including power hierarchies, personal familiarity, clinical gravity, generational differences, and the technical affordances of specific platforms. Emoji were viewed as more acceptable in informal contexts and among peers with whom they had established relationships, and as inappropriate in high-stakes and sensitive clinical contexts. Participants felt formal guidelines could be seen as condescending but suggested modifications to promote the clear and effective use of emoji in professional settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinicians view emoji as useful but context-sensitive communication tools that should be used conscientiously. They disprefer universal, prescriptive guidelines. However, they promote explicit conversations about emoji use at onboarding and the modification of which emoji are available in local messaging platforms.</p>","PeriodicalId":36278,"journal":{"name":"JAMIA Open","volume":"9 4","pages":"ooag159"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13441171/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMIA Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooag159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinicians are increasingly using emoji in digital communication, but limited qualitative work has examined how they assess the appropriateness, risks, and benefits of this practice.

Objective: To characterize clinicians' reported utilization of and attitudes toward emoji in clinical messaging.

Design: Qualitative study using focus groups and a survey from August to October 2025.

Participants: Twenty-nine clinicians at a large academic health system were recruited from 4 specialties and included physicians and advanced practice providers, genetic counselors, medical students, and other healthcare workers.

Approach: Rapid qualitative analysis was used to identify both the benefits and drawbacks of emoji use in clinical messaging.

Key results: Emoji were seen as clarifying tone, building rapport, softening directives, and reducing notification fatigue. However, participants also reported concerns about ambiguity, informality, and potential medicolegal risk due to messages' discoverability. Their assessment of appropriateness was context-dependent, including power hierarchies, personal familiarity, clinical gravity, generational differences, and the technical affordances of specific platforms. Emoji were viewed as more acceptable in informal contexts and among peers with whom they had established relationships, and as inappropriate in high-stakes and sensitive clinical contexts. Participants felt formal guidelines could be seen as condescending but suggested modifications to promote the clear and effective use of emoji in professional settings.

Conclusions: Clinicians view emoji as useful but context-sensitive communication tools that should be used conscientiously. They disprefer universal, prescriptive guidelines. However, they promote explicit conversations about emoji use at onboarding and the modification of which emoji are available in local messaging platforms.

表情符号在临床信息传递:焦点小组研究的结果。
背景:临床医生越来越多地在数字交流中使用表情符号,但有限的定性工作研究了他们如何评估这种做法的适当性、风险和益处。目的:了解临床医生在临床信息传递中对表情符号的使用和态度。设计:2025年8月至10月采用焦点小组和调查进行定性研究。参与者:从一个大型学术卫生系统的4个专业招募了29名临床医生,包括医生和高级实践提供者、遗传咨询师、医学生和其他卫生保健工作者。方法:使用快速定性分析来确定在临床信息中使用表情符号的好处和缺点。关键结果:表情符号被视为澄清语气,建立融洽关系,软化指令,减少通知疲劳。然而,参与者也报告了由于信息的可发现性而对模糊性、非正式性和潜在的医学法律风险的担忧。他们对适当性的评估是情境依赖的,包括权力等级、个人熟悉程度、临床重要性、代际差异和特定平台的技术能力。表情符号被认为在非正式场合和与他们建立了关系的同龄人中更容易被接受,而在高风险和敏感的临床环境中则不合适。参与者认为,正式的指导方针可能会被视为居高俯下,但他们建议进行修改,以促进表情符号在专业场合的清晰有效使用。结论:临床医生认为表情符号是一种有用但对语境敏感的交流工具,应该认真使用。他们不喜欢通用的、说明性的指导方针。然而,他们提倡在入职时就表情符号的使用进行明确的对话,并修改本地消息平台上可用的表情符号。
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
JAMIA Open
JAMIA Open Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
102
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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