The Use of Person-Centered Language in Scientific Research Articles Focused on Autism.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals with developmental conditions, such as autism, experience stigma, which is reflected in derogatory language and labels. To limit stigma associated with disabilities, government agencies and medical organizations have adopted the use of person-centered language (PCL). This study investigated adherence to PCL guidelines among peer-reviewed research publications focused on autism. In addition, we investigated the co-occurrence of stigmatizing language in articles using person-first language (PFL) and identity-first language (IFL) styles. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of PubMed for autism-focused articles from January 2019 to May 2020. Articles from journals with more than 20 search returns were included, and a random sample of 700 publications were screened and examined for inclusion of prespecified, non-PCL terminology. RESULTS: Of the 315 publications, 156 (49.5%) were PCL compliant. Articles frequently used PCL and non-PCL terminology concomitantly, and 10% of publications included obsolete nomenclature. A logistic regression model showed the odds were more likely that publications using IFL were more likely to include other stigmatizing terminology than publications using PFL (odds ratio = 2.03, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-3.58). CONCLUSION: Within medical research, the language to describe individuals and populations needs to be used with intentionality and acknowledges that individuals are more than the diagnosis under study. This may reduce the structural stigma that may be implied otherwise. Our study showed that when PFL is used when addressing individuals with autism, other more stigmatizing language is often avoided and is in line with medical education and clinical practice.

The use of person-centered language in scientific research articles focusing on alcohol use disorder.

AIMS: Worldwide, alcohol use disorder (AUD) is one of the most common substance use disorders, yet often goes undertreated. One major barrier that prevents adequate treatment of AUD is the high stigmatization the disorder receives, including from the scientific community. Thus, we evaluated the current use of patient-centered language (PCL) among AUD-related, journal publications. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis included a systematic search of PubMed AUD-related articles from May 2018 to April 2020. All journals with 20 or more AUD-related, PubMed indexed items with human subjects and available in English were included, resulting in 3445 articles from 49 journals. A random sample of 500 publications were screened and examined for inclusion of pre-specified, non- PCL terminology.. RESULTS: After excluding editorials and commentaries, 292 were retained. We found 59 (20.1 %) publications adhered to PCL. Among articles with non-PCL, labeling occurred in 198 (67.8 %) articles, and emotional language implying helplessness was identified in 123 (42.1 %). We found no difference in PCL adherence with journal ranking nor authorship guidelines requiring AMA/ICMJE adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Our investigation showed that a majority of current AUD literature does not conform to PCL standards. PCL carries a positive connotation and is recommended by multiple professional groups. In continuing the shift toward reducing stigma and increasing advocacy for individuals with AUD, it is necessary for the sources of information that guide clinical practice adhere to PCL. This study is not intended to impede the autonomy of individuals to label themselves or influence terms purposefully used in support programs.