Abstract
Clinical trials are the gold standard in medical research evaluating new treatments in cancer care; however, in the United States, too few patients enroll in trials, especially patients from minority groups. Offering patients the option of a clinical trial is an ethically-charged communicative event for oncologists. One particularly vexed ethical issue is the use of persuasion in trial offers. Based on a corpus of 22 oncology encounters with Caucasian-American (n = 11) and African-American (n = 11) patients, this discourse analysis describes oncologists' use of two persuasive strategies related to the linguistic structure of trial offers: topic placement and topic framing. Findings are presented in total and by patient race, and discussed in terms of whether these strategies may constitute ethical or unethical persuasion, particularly with respect to the ethical issue of undue influence and the social issue of underrepresentation of minorities in cancer clinical trials.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
