ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2022
The Nine Cancer Frames: A Tool to Facilitate Critical Reading of Cancer-Related Information.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Framing analysis as a pedagogical tool for broadening medical students' understanding of cancer: a course evaluation.BMC medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People's ability to critically assess cancer-related information is essential from a preventional and therapeutic, as well as a general democratic perspective. Such cancer literacy is not just about acquiring factual knowledge. It also involves the ability to analyze how the information is contextualized-how cancer is framed. Previous research concerning the framing of cancer in public discourse is voluminous and penetrating but also fragmented and inaccessible to non-experts. In this study, we have developed an integrated and applicable tool for analyzing cancer discourse by systematically classifying distinctive ways of framing of the concept of cancer. Building on previous research and an inductive framing analysis of a broad range of public cancer discourse, systematically selected from British and Norwegian newspapers, we have characterized nine cancer frames: the biomedical, the environmental, the epidemiological, the personal, the sociopolitical, the economic, the antagonistic, the alternative, and the symbolic frame. This framing scheme may be applied to analyze cancer-related discourse across a plurality of themes and contexts. We also show how different frames combine to produce more complex messages, thereby revealing underlying patterns, strategies, and conflicts in cancer communication. In conclusion, this analytical tool enables critical reading of cancer-related information and may be especially useful in educational initiatives to advance health communication and public understanding of cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.