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":"OP2401039"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","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":"","PubModel":"","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.