ClinStigma: A Clinician-Guided Framework for Developing Synthetic Benchmarks of Contextual Stigmatizing Language in Clinical Documentation

Journal: medRxiv
Published Date:

Abstract

Objective Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate, summarize, and evaluate clinical documentation, yet standardized methods for evaluating nuanced, context-dependent clinical language remain limited. Existing approaches rely primarily on annotated clinical corpora or keyword-based methods, restricting reproducibility, public dissemination, and systematic comparison across models. We present ClinStigma, a clinician-guided framework for constructing, annotating, and evaluating synthetic benchmarks of contextual stigmatizing language, demonstrated through ClinStigma-SUD, its inaugural implementation for substance use disorder documentation. Materials and Methods Candidate clinical sentences were generated using a frontier language model and iteratively reviewed according to a clinician-developed annotation rubric refined through expert review in stigmatizing language. The resulting benchmark intentionally incorporates explicit stigmatizing, neutral, and contextually ambiguous ("gray-zone") documentation requiring clinical reasoning rather than keyword recognition. Three locally deployed open-weight LLMs were evaluated using zero-shot inference, followed by external evaluation using independently annotated clinical documentation from MIMIC-IV. Results ClinStigma-SUD consists of 500 clinician-adjudicated synthetic clinical documentation sentences. Inter-rater agreement was 98.8% across the full benchmark (Cohen's {kappa} = 0.976) and 94.0% within the intentionally ambiguous subset ({kappa} = 0.880). Under zero-shot prompting, binary accuracy ranged from 84.8% to 91.8% across evaluated models, while F1 for the ambiguous (gray) class ranged from 0.038 to 0.423. Zero-shot external evaluation on 3,716 annotated examples from the independently annotated Harrigian MIMIC-IV corpus yielded 84.4% accuracy (84.4% balanced accuracy; macro F1 0.824), against a 69.9% majority-class baseline. Stigmatizing-class F1 was 0.879 in the substance-related subgroup and 0.883 in the full external corpus. Discussion and Conclusion ClinStigma establishes a reproducible clinician-guided framework for developing synthetic evaluation benchmarks for contextual clinical language. By combining structured clinical expertise, explicit annotation guidance, synthetic benchmark generation, and external evaluation, the framework enables open, privacy-preserving evaluation of language models while providing a scalable foundation for benchmark development across additional clinical specialties, including obstetrics, emergency medicine, and mental health.

Authors

  • Izzo
  • J. A.; McIntyre
  • A. M.; Nguyen
  • J.; Bashaw
  • D.; Torrance
  • C. A.; Foster
  • J.