ArticleQualitative health research2024
A Discourse of Deviance: Blame, Shame, Stigma and the Social Construction of Head and Neck Cancer.
Article in Qualitative health research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trauma-informed care within oncology? Understanding the impact of childhood trauma on experiences of cancer and cancer services in adulthood.British journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- From Mechanisms to Manifestations: A Scoping Review Exploring Cancer-Related Discrimination.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Pain, Shame, and Power: An Autoethnographic Exploration of Chronic Pain.Qualitative health research · 2026Article
- Using systems thinking to guide the dissemination of the European code against cancer, 5th edition.Molecular oncology · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Guilt and Self-Blame with Early Maladaptive Schemas in Patients with Cancer:Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2026Article
- "Women's experiences of head and neck cancer: an interpretative phenomenological analysis".BMC women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer of the head and neck is a confronting condition, as the disease and its treatments alter the appearance and function of body organs associated with physical appearance and identity. Many of the risk factors for head and neck cancers, including tobacco, alcohol, and human papilloma virus, can also have significant negative social and moral permutations. Language and action (discourse) plays an important role in constructing disease and illness and shape the way it is managed, both institutionally and socially. This research used a critical constructionist lens to investigate how the common discourses surrounding head and neck cancer are constructed within the healthcare context and how this influences patients and healthcare professionals' responses to the illness. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, field noting, journaling and literature reviews. Analysis was guided by a three-dimensional approach to critical discourse analysis that investigated text, discursive practices, and social context. The overarching finding was that deviance dominates the common discourse and shapes head and neck cancer and responses to it. Deviance is channelled through metaphors, adjectives, descriptors, and collective nouns and is made overt through labelling, avoidance, blaming, shame, and categorization. Discourse is contextualized by a sociocultural understanding that when someone deviates from what is perceived as normal, they are devalued. Open dialogue and reflection on head and neck cancer discourse could enable better understanding of how people experience their condition and inform more supportive responses.
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.