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

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Home Health Care Management & Practice
Published
2025-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10848223251367385
Primary Topic
Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Scott Sittig, Maxim Topaz, Jacquelyn Y. Taylor, Chase Wesley Raymond et al.
Home Health Care Management & Practice
Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
article

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

Scott Sittig, Maxim Topaz, Jacquelyn Y. Taylor, Chase Wesley Raymond, Laura Prescott, Micheal Morrison, Stephanie Potts‐Thompson, Margaret V. McDonald, Zhihong Zhang
article en

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.

Home Health Care Management & Practice
VNS Health (US), University of Colorado Boulder (US), University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US), Columbia University (US), University of Louisiana at Lafayette (US), University of Colorado Denver (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.