Explore the vast range of titles available.

Person-centered language places a person's identity before any disability or medical condition they may have. Using person-centered language reduces stigma and improves the patient-physician relationship, potentially optimizing health outcomes. Patients with psoriasis often feel stigmatized due to their chronic skin condition. We seek to evaluate the use of person-centered language in psoriasis literature and to explore whether certain article characteristics were associated with non-person-centered language. We performed a systematic search on PubMed for recently published articles in journals that regularly publish psoriasis studies. After article reduction procedures, randomization, and screening, we reached our target sample of 400 articles. The following non-person-centered language terms were extracted from each article: \"Psoriasis Patient,\" \"Psoriasis subject,\" \"Affected with,\" \"Sufferer,\" \"Suffering from,\" \"Burdened with,\" \"Afflicted with,\" and \"Problems with.\" Screening and data extraction occurred in a masked duplicate fashion. Of the 400 included articles, 272 (68%) were not adherent to person-centered language guidelines according to the American Medical Association Manual of Style. The most frequent non-person-centered language term was \"Psoriasis Patient,\" found in 174 (43.5%) articles. The stigmatizing language was associated with the type of article and funding status, with original investigations and funded studies having higher rates of stigmatizing language. Articles about psoriasis commonly use non-person-centered language terms. It is important to shift away from using stigmatizing language about patients with psoriasis to avoid potential untoward influences. We recommend using \"patients with psoriasis\" or \"patient living with psoriasis\" to emphasize the importance of person-centered care.

Stigmatizing language or non-person-centered language (non-PCL) has been shown to impact patients negatively, especially in the case of obesity. This has led many associations, such as the American Medical Association (AMA) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), to enact guidelines prohibiting the use of stigmatizing language in medical research. In 2018, the AMA adopted person-centered language (PCL) guidelines, including a specific obesity amendment to which all researchers should adhere. However, little research has been conducted to determine if these guidelines are being followed. Our primary objective was to determine if PCL guidelines specific to obesity have been properly followed in the sports medicine journals that are interacted with most frequently. We searched within PubMed for obesity-related articles between 2019 and 2022 published in the top 10 most-interacted sports medicine journals based on Google Metrics data. A predetermined list of stigmatizing and non-PCL terms/language was searched within each article. A total of 198 articles were sampled, of which 58.6 % were found to be not compliant with PCL guidelines. The most common non-PCL terms were \"obese\" utilized in 49.5 % of articles, followed by \"overweight\" as the next most common stigmatizing term at 40.4 %. Stigmatizing labels such as \"heavy, heavier, heaviness,\" \"fat\" as an adjective, and \"morbid\" appeared in articles but at a lower rate. Our study shows that there is a severe lack of adherence to PCL guidelines in the most-interacted sports medicine journals. Negative associations between stigmatizing language and individuals with obesity will only persist if a greater effort is not made to change this. All journals, including the most prestigious ones, should adopt and execute PCL guidelines to prevent the spread of demeaning language in the medical community.

Amputations are routine in orthopedics, specifically during trauma and when patients have recurrent surgical site infections. When undergoing amputations, patients must combat the psychosocial factors associated with the loss of an extremity, including stigmatization. This study analyzes the presence of person-centered language (PCL) within amputation-related orthopedic publications in the top orthopedic journals. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis with a database search on February 14, 2021 utilizing PubMed. Utilizing a previously published search string, we isolated studies that were published in the top 20 orthopedic journals based on the Google h5-index. In addition to the top 20 orthopedic journals, we included the top two hand and foot & ankle journals in our search to incorporate more amputation literature. Our search yielded 687 returns. The sample was then randomized, and the first 300 studies that fit our inclusion criteria were examined for prespecified non-PCL terminology. Our results show that 157 (52.2%) studies were adherent to PCL according to the American Medical Association's Manual of Style 10th Edition (AMAMS). Of the 143 (47.7%) studies that were not adherent to PCL, 51 studies (35.7%) had more than one type of non-PCL language. The term \"amputee,\" which is being labeled as identity-first language (IFL), was found in 101 articles (33.7%). Further investigation found that 73.3% (74/101) of the studies containing IFL were found to have other non-PCL terms. Of the other studies in the sample, non-PCL was found 34.7% (88/199) of the time. This analysis was done due to the discrepancies in stigmatization of the term \"amputee.\" No statistical association was found between adherence to PCL and study characteristics. Our findings show that amputation literature within the top orthopedic journals has limited adherence to PCL. Additionally, the use of the term \"amputee,\" which is widely accepted by the amputation community, resulted in a greater rate of non-PCL terminology within orthopedic amputation literature. Efforts should be implemented within orthopedics to avoid the use of stigmatizing language, regarding individuals that underwent amputations, to minimize psychosocial stressors.

Parents with substance use disorders are highly stigmatized by multiple systems (e.g., healthcare, education, legal, social). As a result, they are more likely to experience discrimination and health inequities [ 1 , 2 ]. Children of parents with substance use disorders often do not fare any better, as they frequently experience stigma and poorer outcomes by association [ 3 , 4 ]. Calls to action for person-centered language for alcohol and other drug problems have led to improved terminology [ 5 , 6 , 7 – 8 ]. Despite a long history of stigmatizing, offensive labels such as “children of alcoholics” and “crack babies,” children have been left out of person-centered language initiatives. Children of parents with substance use disorders can feel invisible, shameful, isolated, and forgotten—particularly in treatment settings when programming is centered on the parent [ 9 , 10 ]. Person-centered language is shown to improve treatment outcomes and reduce stigma [ 11 , 12 ]. Therefore, we need to adhere to consistent, non-stigmatizing terminology when referencing children of parents with substance use disorders. Most importantly, we must center the voices and preferences of those with lived experience to enact meaningful change and effective resource allocation.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in children and often goes untreated. A major barrier to treatment is the stigma surrounding the disorder, including from the educational and scientific community. Person-centered language (PCL) is associated with positive health outcomes, and its implementation is recommended by multiple professional groups, but its use has not been quantified for ADHD. The goal of this study is to quantify the adherence to PCL among ADHD-related journal publications utilizing a cross-sectional study design. We conducted a cross-sectional examination including a systematic search of PubMed, which encompasses MEDLINE, for ADHD-related articles from January 2014 to March 2021. All journals with at least 20 ADHD-related search returns, human research, and in the English language were included, totaling 5,308 articles from 88 journals. Articles were randomized, and the first 500 were screened for inclusion of prespecified, non-PCL terminology. After exclusion, 311 articles were retained. Of the 311 retained articles, 131 (42.1%) adhered to PCL guidelines. Among articles with non-PCL, stigmatizing language such as \"problem(s) with [the/a] child or problem child\" and \"suffers from\" was found most frequently- occurring in 47.6% (148/311) and 5.8% (18/311) of the articles, respectively. We found no significant association between PCL adherence and study characteristics. Our findings revealed that over half of the current ADHD literature did not adhere to PCL guidelines. Adherence to PCL by the scientific and medical community will increase the overall efforts to mitigate stigma and increase support for individuals with ADHD.

INTRODUCTION Person‐centered outcomes that capture clinically meaningful change are essential to non‐pharmacological intervention research for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome characterized by progressive language impairment. The Communication Bridge‐2 (CB2) randomized controlled trial previously demonstrated the efficacy of a personalized, participation‐focused speech‐language intervention on Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS), a person‐centered communication participation outcome. This secondary responder analysis characterized meaningful participant‐ and goal‐level response following intervention and at 12 months after enrollment to inform clinical translation and future appropriate use criteria. METHODS Fifty participants with mild to moderate PPA in the CB2 experimental arm, each with three individualized communication participation goals (N = 150 goals), were included. Prespecified responder thresholds were defined as GAS ≥1 following each intervention block and GAS ≥0 at 12 months, reflecting improvement or maintenance relative to baseline in a progressive condition. Descriptive analyses examined responder patterns across time points, participants, baseline severity, PPA subtypes, and goal characteristics. RESULTS All participants met responder criteria at one or more evaluation time points. At 12 months, 79% of goals met responder criteria, and 60% of participants met responder criteria across all three goals. More than half of the goals (51.3%) met responder criteria at all three evaluation time points. Meaningful response was observed across PPA subtypes, baseline severity levels, and diverse goal characteristics. Exploratory patterns suggested higher 12‐month responder rates for goals targeting speech, familiar communication partners, and familiar communication contexts. DISCUSSION This secondary responder analysis demonstrates that a person‐centered, participation‐focused speech‐language intervention was associated with meaningful goal‐level improvement or maintenance across a heterogeneous PPA population, with many responses sustained over 12 months. These findings support the value of GAS as a pragmatic, person‐centered outcome for capturing meaningful response in progressive neurodegenerative disease and provide translational evidence to inform future appropriate use criteria and individualized dementia care. Highlights Person‐centered speech‐language intervention showed response in PPA. GAS captured meaningful improvement and maintenance. All CB2 experimental‐arm participants showed response at one or more time points. Response was observed across PPA subtypes and mild to moderate severity levels. Findings support translation to individualized dementia care and future appropriate use criteria.

INTRODUCTION Assessments of communication for people living with primary progressive aphasia (PwPPA) remain limited. This work describes the development of a strengths‐based, ecologically valid instrument – the Progressive Aphasia Communication Toolkit (PACT). METHODS This work consisted of five experiments: two to develop (Experiments 1 and 2) and three to pilot (Experiments 3 to 5) a novel instrument for PPA. Ninety‐five individuals worldwide contributed to this work: 80 researchers and clinicians, nine PwPPA, and six care partners. RESULTS Experiments 1 and 2 yielded a four‐scale instrument comprising quantitative and qualitative feedback. Experiments 3 to 5 resulted in structural refinement and digitization of the tool, revealed strong PwPPA and care partner acceptance of the PACT, and demonstrated high inter‐rater agreement for general observability (91%) and perceived communication strength (85%). DISCUSSION Current findings indicate that the PACT provides a holistic profile of communication strengths for PwPPA and can guide clinicians in developing functional therapeutic targets. Highlights Instruments to evaluate communicative competence in PwPPA are centered on diagnosis and impairment. Documentation of communication strengths has direct implications for person‐centered care and behavioral intervention. The PACT was developed in partnership with expert clinicians, researchers, PwPPA, and care partners. The PACT captures functional, real‐world communication ability through a structured conversation and provides a shared framework to describe communicative competence across disciplines. Preliminary findings support that the PACT is ecologically valid, minimally burdensome, preferred by PwPPA and care partners, and clinically feasible for clinicians and researchers. Future work will serve to develop cultural‐linguistic adaptations of the PACT and investigate the instrument's validity, reliability, and feasibility as an assessment procedure for PwPPA in a larger sample.

Person-first language is taught in most health professions programs and mandated by scholarly journals but is often not practiced by health care practitioners. The disconnection between academia and clinical practice is significant. Students and new practitioners are often faced with the challenge of holding to their training or falling in line with the status quo. While the use of person-first language should be the norm in all health care settings, unfortunately, often the opposite is true. The person-first language movement began in 1974. Since that time, the culture of disability has drastically changed. There is greater integration of individuals with a disability and with that integration has come greater understanding and acceptance. Increased community integration has allowed for greater opportunities for advocacy and has also forced a shift in how the community at large views people with a disability. This shift in how individuals with a disability are viewed has resulted in a change in language. A change in semantics is not enough. Health professions educators need to ensure that students understand why this change has taken place and why it is essential. The power language can have not only on patient care but also on patient outcomes is profound and should be understood by both educators and practitioners alike. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the factors surrounding person-first language and its integration into health care, including the difference between what is taught and mandated, and what is practiced.

Introduction Effective communication between patients and healthcare professionals has been shown to contribute to beneficial patient outcomes but requires recognition of linguistic and cultural differences. This is critical in a locality like Auckland which has been shown to be the most diverse region in New Zealand in terms of ethnicity, languages and culture. English is the most spoken language in New Zealand, followed by Te Reo Māori. The aim of this qualitative, phenomenological study was to explore and describe the experience of radiographers communicating with patients in a multi‐cultural, multi‐lingual healthcare setting in Auckland, New Zealand. Methods The research study population included radiographers registered with the Medical Radiation Technologists Board (MRTB) employed at the study location. The participant recruitment process included convenience, purposive, and snowball sampling. Data was collected through individual interviews that were audio‐recorded and transcribed verbatim, with the sample size (n = 11) determined through the saturation of themes. Data was analysed by means of Tesch's framework for data analysis. Results Four themes emerged: (a) cross‐cultural challenges in patient communication; (b) enhanced patient‐centred care through culturally responsive communication; (c) tailored communication methods based on contextual patient factors; and (d) adaptive communication strategies. Conclusion This study underscores the importance of adaptive communication in overcoming linguistic and cultural barriers, emphasising the need for culturally safe and patient‐centered care while maintaining professionals' responsibility to provide quality care to diverse patient populations. The findings have relevance beyond Māori context, highlighting the changing role of radiographers towards equitable and culturally sensitive healthcare. This study underscores the importance of adaptive communication in overcoming linguistic and cultural barriers, emphasising the need for culturally safe and patient‐centred care while maintaining professionals' responsibility to provide quality care to diverse patient populations. The findings have relevance beyond the Māori (New Zealand indigenous people) context, highlighting the changing role of MITs towards equitable and culturally sensitive healthcare.

The aim of this study was to describe the perspectives of diabetes care professionals regarding the roles and responsibilities of people with diabetes (PWD), health care professionals (HCPs), and the larger society to improve the provision of person-centered diabetes care. The survey contained open-ended items about challenges of, successes of, and wishes for improvements in treating adults with diabetes. All responses were systematically coded using a schema developed and validated through multinational collaboration. Participants were 4785 diabetes care professionals (physicians, nurses, and dietitians) from 17 countries. The data contained 2 distinct themes. One theme reflected the fact that the roles and responsibilities of HCPs are transitioning from those of one who “tells” to one who “listens” to PWD. Some ways that HCPs can “listen” to PWD and family members is to involve them in goals and to encourage self-management for the improvement of treatment. The second theme identified barriers to successful diabetes care, which include a lack of time and collaboration from HCPs, a lack of availability of resources for treatment, and a lack of psychosocial support. The views of diabetes care professionals are in transition from a conventional hierarchic approach to a PCC approach. Further adoption of this approach would be facilitated by additional psychosocial training and educational/psychological resources, increased teamwork, and societal changes that would make it easier for people to live successfully with diabetes.