Marketing cancer care: A content analysis of ethical compliance in television advertising by top-ranked U.S. cancer centers

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES

Journal of Cancer Policy Pub Date : 2025-05-10 DOI:10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100591

Andrew J. Baldassarre , Amitabha Palmer

{"title":"Marketing cancer care: A content analysis of ethical compliance in television advertising by top-ranked U.S. cancer centers","authors":"Andrew J. Baldassarre , Amitabha Palmer","doi":"10.1016/j.jcpo.2025.100591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) in cancer care influences patient decisions but often targets vulnerable populations. Despite established ethical guidelines, adherence remains understudied. This study evaluates how well top U.S. cancer centers comply with these standards in television advertisements.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We analyzed 31 TV ads from 2019 to 2024 produced by members of the top 20 cancer centers as ranked by U.S. News & World Report, comparing them against ethical guidelines from the American Medical Association, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and others. Two independent reviewers categorized ads as compliant, borderline, or transgressive. Transgressive ads explicitly violated guidelines, while borderline cases contained ambiguous claims with at least one problematic interpretation.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 31 ads from 12 institutions, 16 (52 %) were either transgressive or borderline. Only 4 of 12 (33 %) institutions produced exclusively compliant ads. Common issues included unrealistic expectations (36 %), implying exclusive treatment availability (13 %), and unclear eligibility criteria (13 %). Notably, institutions ranked in the top 10 produced 71 % of the ads and were responsible for 8 of 9 transgressive cases.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The prevalence of transgressive advertising suggests that ethical guidelines alone are insufficient. Potential solutions include increasing awareness among marketing leadership and enforcing compliance, possibly as a hospital accreditation requirement.</div><div>Policy Summary:</div><div>As cancer care continues to advance and treatment options become more complex, ensuring advertising practices adhere to extant ethical guidelines is crucial for supporting informed patient decision-making and maintaining public trust in healthcare institutions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":38212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Policy","volume":"44 ","pages":"Article 100591"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213538325000359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) in cancer care influences patient decisions but often targets vulnerable populations. Despite established ethical guidelines, adherence remains understudied. This study evaluates how well top U.S. cancer centers comply with these standards in television advertisements.

Methods

We analyzed 31 TV ads from 2019 to 2024 produced by members of the top 20 cancer centers as ranked by U.S. News & World Report, comparing them against ethical guidelines from the American Medical Association, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and others. Two independent reviewers categorized ads as compliant, borderline, or transgressive. Transgressive ads explicitly violated guidelines, while borderline cases contained ambiguous claims with at least one problematic interpretation.

Results

Of the 31 ads from 12 institutions, 16 (52 %) were either transgressive or borderline. Only 4 of 12 (33 %) institutions produced exclusively compliant ads. Common issues included unrealistic expectations (36 %), implying exclusive treatment availability (13 %), and unclear eligibility criteria (13 %). Notably, institutions ranked in the top 10 produced 71 % of the ads and were responsible for 8 of 9 transgressive cases.

Conclusion

The prevalence of transgressive advertising suggests that ethical guidelines alone are insufficient. Potential solutions include increasing awareness among marketing leadership and enforcing compliance, possibly as a hospital accreditation requirement.

Policy Summary:

As cancer care continues to advance and treatment options become more complex, ensuring advertising practices adhere to extant ethical guidelines is crucial for supporting informed patient decision-making and maintaining public trust in healthcare institutions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

营销癌症护理：美国顶级癌症中心电视广告中道德合规的内容分析

背景：癌症护理中的直接面向消费者广告（DTCA）影响患者的决策，但往往针对弱势群体。尽管有既定的道德准则，但依从性仍未得到充分研究。这项研究评估了美国顶级癌症中心在电视广告中遵守这些标准的程度。方法：我们分析了2019年至2024年由美国新闻排名前20位的癌症中心成员制作的31个电视广告；将它们与美国医学协会、美国临床肿瘤学会和其他机构的伦理准则进行比较。两名独立评论家将广告分为合规、边缘和违规三类。违规广告明确违反了准则，而边缘案例包含模棱两可的声明，至少有一个有问题的解释。结果12所院校的31条广告中，有16条（52. %）存在违法或边缘性行为。12家机构中只有4家（33 %）制作了完全合规的广告。常见的问题包括不切实际的期望（36 %），暗示独家治疗的可用性（13 %），以及不明确的资格标准（13 %）。值得注意的是，排名前10位的机构制作了71% %的广告，并对9起违规事件中的8起负责。结论违规广告的盛行表明仅靠道德准则是不够的。潜在的解决方案包括提高营销领导的意识，并强制执行合规性，可能将其作为医院认证的要求。政策摘要：随着癌症治疗的不断发展和治疗方案的复杂化，确保广告实践遵守现有的道德准则对于支持知情的患者决策和维护公众对医疗机构的信任至关重要。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊