OBJECTIVES: In 2023, AMIA's Inclusive Language and Context Style Guidelines (the "Guidelines") were approved by the Board of Directors and made a publicly available resource. This work began in 2021 through AMIA's DEI Task Force and subsequent DEI Committee; many members provided input, feedback, and time to create the Guidelines. In this paper, the authors provide a transparent account of the origin, development, contents, and dissemination of the Guidelines and share plans for their future development and use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our approach to drafting, refining, and distributing the Guidelines included consulting existing language guides, AMIA member reviews, external expert reviews, webinars, and workshops. Through an iterative approach to drafting and refining the Guidelines, the authors consulted relevant language guidelines and many experts throughout and beyond the AMIA community. RESULTS: The Inclusive Language Context Guidelines were formally approved by the AMIA Board of Directors on February 15, 2023. The Guidelines included four principles to be considered in scientific communications: Plurality, Precision, Transparency, and Destigmatization. DISCUSSION: A moment of vulnerability where an AMIA member raised concerns about the use of harmful language during a presentation resulted in the creation of a principled approach to support inclusive language within biomedical and health informatics communications. We envision that the Guidelines will support health equity by challenging dominant public narratives around health, fostering stronger interdisciplinary collaboration and critical thinking about the impact of language, and creating a more welcoming environment for the broader AMIA community. This work could not have been completed without the support of many AMIA members and other researchers in biomedical and health informatics. The Guidelines are a living document that will continue to be updated with input and feedback from the AMIA community into the future.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to describe gender representation in leadership and recognition within the U.S. biomedical informatics community. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected from public websites or provided by American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) personnel from 2017 to 2019, including gender of membership, directors of academic informatics programs, clinical informatics subspecialty fellowships, AMIA leadership (2014-2019), and AMIA awardees (1993-2019). Differences in gender proportions were calculated using chi-square tests. RESULTS: Men were more often in leadership positions and award recipients (P < .01). Men led 74.7% (n = 71 of 95) of academic informatics programs and 83.3% (n = 35 of 42) of clinical informatics fellowships. Within AMIA, men held 56.8% (n = 1086 of 1913) of leadership roles and received 64.1% (n = 59 of 92) of awards. DISCUSSION: As in other STEM fields, leadership and recognition in biomedical informatics is lower for women. CONCLUSIONS: Quantifying gender inequity should inform data-driven strategies to foster diversity and inclusion. Standardized collection and surveillance of demographic data within biomedical informatics is necessary.

OBJECTIVE: Traditionally, patient groups with a phenotype are selected through rule-based definitions whose creation and validation are time-consuming. Machine learning approaches to electronic phenotyping are limited by the paucity of labeled training datasets. We demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing semi-automatically labeled training sets to create phenotype models via machine learning, using a comprehensive representation of the patient medical record. METHODS: We use a list of keywords specific to the phenotype of interest to generate noisy labeled training data. We train L1 penalized logistic regression models for a chronic and an acute disease and evaluate the performance of the models against a gold standard. RESULTS: Our models for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and myocardial infarction achieve precision and accuracy of 0.90, 0.89, and 0.86, 0.89, respectively. Local implementations of the previously validated rule-based definitions for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and myocardial infarction achieve precision and accuracy of 0.96, 0.92 and 0.84, 0.87, respectively.We have demonstrated feasibility of learning phenotype models using imperfectly labeled data for a chronic and acute phenotype. Further research in feature engineering and in specification of the keyword list can improve the performance of the models and the scalability of the approach. CONCLUSIONS: Our method provides an alternative to manual labeling for creating training sets for statistical models of phenotypes. Such an approach can accelerate research with large observational healthcare datasets and may also be used to create local phenotype models.