Using natural language processing to explore differences in healthcare professionals’ language on Functional Neurological Disorder: a comparative topic and sentiment analysis study

TL;DR

This study uses NLP to analyze how neurologists and psychologists communicate about Functional Neurological Disorder, revealing differences in language and tone that may affect patient care.

Contribution

The study introduces a comparative NLP analysis of clinician communication styles in FND care, focusing on topic and sentiment differences.

Findings

Psychologists used terms related to subjective experiences like 'trauma' and 'awareness', while neurologists focused on medicalized language.

Psychologists' communication was more positive and proactive, whereas neurologists used a neutral or cautious tone.

The study highlights the need for standardized clinical terminology and integrated care pathways in FND.

Abstract

Effective communication is essential for delivering quality healthcare, particularly for individuals with Functional Neurological Disorders (FND), who are often subject to misdiagnosis and stigmatising language that implies symptom fabrication. Variability in communication styles among healthcare professionals may contribute to these challenges, affecting patient understanding and care outcomes.

This study employed natural language processing (NLP) to analyse clinician-to-clinician and clinician-to-patient communication regarding FND. A total of 869 electronic health records (EHRs) were examined to assess differences in language use and emotional tone across various professionals—specifically, neurologists and psychologists—and different document types, such as discharge summaries and letters to general practitioners (GPs). Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modelling and two complementary sentiment models (VADER and Flair) were applied to the corpus. Sentiment analysis was also applied to evaluate the emotional tone of communications.

Findings revealed distinct communication patterns between neurologists and psychologists. Psychologists frequently used terms related to subjective experiences, such as “trauma” and “awareness,” aiming to help patients understand their diagnosis. In contrast, neurologists focused on medicalised narratives, emphasising symptoms like “seizures” and clinical interventions, including assessment (“telemetry”) and treatment (“medication”). Sentiment analysis indicated that psychologists tended to use more positive and proactive language, whereas neurologists generally adopted a neutral or cautious tone.

These findings highlight differences in communication styles and emotional tones among professionals involved in FND care. The study underscores the importance of fostering integrated, multidisciplinary care pathways and developing standardised guidelines for clinical terminology in FND to improve communication and patient outcomes. Future research should explore how these communication patterns influence patient experiences and treatment adherence.

Figures