ArticleThe oncologist2025
Exploring the ethical use of race in cancer research.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine if race was used biologically, socially, or both ways in oncology cooperative group trials.
backgroundThe National Institute of Health defines race as a social construct that groups people based on physical appearance, social factors, and cultural background. While the use of race may no longer be as problematic as it once was, race is still sometimes misused in scientific research. This misuse can contribute to the belief that there is a biological difference between racial groups, warranting unequal and unjust treatment.
methodWe analyzed 32 research articles from 2002 to 2011 and 100 articles from 2016 to 2023 conducted by seven prominent cooperative cancer groups-NCORP, NRG, ECOG, Alliance, SWOG, COG, and ACRIN-to describe how race is used either as a socially, biologically, or both.
resultsEleven of the 32 early articles and 62 of the 100 later articles used race to answer the question posed or the hypothesis. 6/11(55%) early articles and 38/62(61%) later articles used race as a social construct, 2/11(18%) and 4/62(6%) used race biologically, and 3/11(27%) and 11/62(18%) used race both ways. The remaining 9(15%) of the later articles did not use race biologically or socially and were labeled Neither. IMPLICATIONS AND
conclusionScientific articles should use race as a social construct. Although most articles used race appropriately, the few that did not or were unclear show that there needs to be a greater awareness of the impact of language about race in scientific studies. Correctly using race is crucial to ethical research.
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.