How researchers refer to individuals with schizophrenia: person-first and identity-first language in academic papers.

Stigma associated with schizophrenia has been well-documented in both society and healthcare settings. However, the use of stigmatizing language in research papers remains largely unexplored. This study examined how researchers refer to schizophrenia in peer-reviewed articles, aiming to characterize the descriptive terms used to refer to individuals with schizophrenia and assess the adoption of person-first language. We conducted an electronic search on PubMed using the MeSH term "schizophrenia" and randomly selected 500 articles. Descriptive terminology was categorized as neutral (e.g., "schizophrenia patients"), person-first (e.g., "person with schizophrenia"), or identity-first (e.g., "schizophrenic patient"). Reference terms were assessed based on their alignment with a person-first perspective. Of the 500 studies, 475 (95%) included at least one term referring to people affected by schizophrenia. Among them, 238 (50.1%) used identity-first terms, 228 (48%) used person-first terms, and 91 (18.2%) employed both. Over time, the use of identity-first terms decreased. The decline in identity-first terms over time suggests a positive impact of the person-first movement. Despite these encouraging findings, our data also indicate that there is still room for improvement in reducing the use of identity-first terms. We propose recommendations for researchers to promote less stigmatizing language.