Assessment of Compliance With ASCO Language of Respect Guidelines in Renal Cell Carcinoma Abstracts.

IF 4.6 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY JCO oncology practice Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-07 DOI:10.1200/OP-24-01039
Nazli Dizman, Ruchi Agarwal, Daniela V Castro, Benjamin Mercier, Xiaochen Li, Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Megan H Wong, Ethan Chan, Akasha Dukkipati, Teebro Paul, Amber Faridi, Jalen Patel, Jaya Goud, Trishita Paul, Malina Ioschici, Zeynep Irem Ozay, Miguel Zugman, Hedyeh Ebrahimi, Alex Chehrazi-Raffle, Tanya B Dorff, Sumanta K Pal, Narjust Florez
{"title":"Assessment of Compliance With ASCO Language of Respect Guidelines in Renal Cell Carcinoma Abstracts.","authors":"Nazli Dizman, Ruchi Agarwal, Daniela V Castro, Benjamin Mercier, Xiaochen Li, Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Megan H Wong, Ethan Chan, Akasha Dukkipati, Teebro Paul, Amber Faridi, Jalen Patel, Jaya Goud, Trishita Paul, Malina Ioschici, Zeynep Irem Ozay, Miguel Zugman, Hedyeh Ebrahimi, Alex Chehrazi-Raffle, Tanya B Dorff, Sumanta K Pal, Narjust Florez","doi":"10.1200/OP-24-01039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The ASCO Language of Respect (LOR) Guidelines were developed in 2020 to promote patient-respectful language in abstracts and presentations. We assessed adherence to LOR guidelines among renal cell carcinoma (RCC) abstracts presented at the 2023 and 2019 ASCO Annual Meetings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically evaluated each statement in all RCC abstracts for compliance with the three clauses of LOR guidelines: \"Do not blame patients,\" \"Respect the role of patients,\" and \"Do not dehumanize patients.\" Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with noncompliance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 101 abstracts from 2023, the majority involved clinical research (66.3%) and had a character count at limit, defined as within 5% of the 2,600-character limit (51.5%). In 60.4% of abstracts, at least one statement violated the LOR guidelines. Proportions of abstracts with one or more statements with dehumanizing, blaming, or disrespectful language were 46.5%, 21.8%, and 1.0%, respectively. Among all variables examined, including research and author characteristics, abstracts at character limit emerged as the only category with significantly higher rates of noncompliance (62.3% <i>v</i> 35.0%, <i>P</i> = .013). Multivariable analyses showed an odds ratio of 3.3 (95% CI, 1.4 to 7.6, <i>P</i> = .006) for abstracts at character limit to have at least one noncompliant statement. Notably, even among abstracts not at character limit, 46.9% contained statements violating the guidelines. Between 2019 and 2023, the rate of statements that violated the LOR guidelines decreased from 71.0% to 60.4%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A significant proportion of RCC abstracts contain language inconsistent with LOR guidelines. Although character limit is a likely contributor, our report highlights the need for our professional societies and abstract reviewers to cultivate greater awareness and adherence to patient-respectful language.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"1689-1694"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-24-01039","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The ASCO Language of Respect (LOR) Guidelines were developed in 2020 to promote patient-respectful language in abstracts and presentations. We assessed adherence to LOR guidelines among renal cell carcinoma (RCC) abstracts presented at the 2023 and 2019 ASCO Annual Meetings.

Methods: We systematically evaluated each statement in all RCC abstracts for compliance with the three clauses of LOR guidelines: "Do not blame patients," "Respect the role of patients," and "Do not dehumanize patients." Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with noncompliance.

Results: Among 101 abstracts from 2023, the majority involved clinical research (66.3%) and had a character count at limit, defined as within 5% of the 2,600-character limit (51.5%). In 60.4% of abstracts, at least one statement violated the LOR guidelines. Proportions of abstracts with one or more statements with dehumanizing, blaming, or disrespectful language were 46.5%, 21.8%, and 1.0%, respectively. Among all variables examined, including research and author characteristics, abstracts at character limit emerged as the only category with significantly higher rates of noncompliance (62.3% v 35.0%, P = .013). Multivariable analyses showed an odds ratio of 3.3 (95% CI, 1.4 to 7.6, P = .006) for abstracts at character limit to have at least one noncompliant statement. Notably, even among abstracts not at character limit, 46.9% contained statements violating the guidelines. Between 2019 and 2023, the rate of statements that violated the LOR guidelines decreased from 71.0% to 60.4%.

Conclusion: A significant proportion of RCC abstracts contain language inconsistent with LOR guidelines. Although character limit is a likely contributor, our report highlights the need for our professional societies and abstract reviewers to cultivate greater awareness and adherence to patient-respectful language.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肾细胞癌患者遵守ASCO尊重语言指南的评估摘要。
目的:ASCO尊重语言(LOR)指南于2020年制定,旨在促进在摘要和报告中使用尊重患者的语言。我们评估了2023年和2019年ASCO年会上提交的肾细胞癌(RCC)摘要对LOR指南的依从性。方法:我们系统地评估了所有RCC摘要中的每个陈述是否符合LOR指南的三个条款:“不责怪患者”、“尊重患者的角色”和“不使患者失去人性”。进行单变量和多变量分析以确定与不依从性相关的因素。结果:在2023年的101篇摘要中,大多数涉及临床研究(66.3%),并且具有字数限制,定义为在2600个字符限制(51.5%)的5%以内。在60.4%的摘要中,至少有一个陈述违反了LOR指南。摘要中含有非人化、责备或不尊重语言的比例分别为46.5%、21.8%和1.0%。在包括研究和作者特征在内的所有变量中,字符限制的摘要是唯一一个不符合率显著较高的类别(62.3% vs 35.0%, P = 0.013)。多变量分析显示,在字符限制的摘要中,至少有一个不符合语句的比值比为3.3 (95% CI, 1.4至7.6,P = 0.006)。值得注意的是,即使在没有字符限制的摘要中,也有46.9%的摘要包含违反指导原则的语句。在2019年至2023年期间,违反LOR指南的陈述率从71.0%下降到60.4%。结论:相当大比例的RCC摘要包含与LOR指南不一致的语言。虽然字符限制可能是一个因素,但我们的报告强调,我们的专业协会和摘要审稿人需要培养更多的意识,并坚持尊重患者的语言。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
期刊最新文献
Budget Impact Analysis of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy With Interval Cytoreductive Surgery in Ovarian Cancer. Durable Complete Response and Potential Cure With Systemic Chemotherapy in Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Case Series of Patients. Increasing Access and Quality Care for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Thyroid Dysfunction. What is on the Horizon Beyond Platinum and Immunotherapy for Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Without Actionable Genomic Aberrations? Safety, Feasibility, and Patient Experience of Ten-Minute Pembrolizumab Infusions: A Prospective Cohort Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1