The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) has developed a comprehensive language guide to help oncologists, researchers, and healthcare professionals adopt best practices in communication. The guide emphasizes the importance of using language that is respectful, inclusive, and free of stigma. As part of its commitment to improving relationships between clinicians, patients, caregivers, and advocates, IASLC encourages its members to apply thoughtful language across all levels of scientific communication, including conferences, abstracts, and clinical settings.
Introduction to the IASLC Language Guide
The goal of this language guide is to promote awareness and encourage the use of respectful, inclusive language that acknowledges the dignity of people living with lung cancer. It is critical for language in scientific and clinical settings to evolve in a way that avoids perpetuating stigma and ensures clarity, empathy, and respect for all individuals involved. This updated guide aligns with the latest scientific trends and includes practical recommendations for oncologists on how to communicate with sensitivity and care.
Section 1: Accessible and Respectful Language
Language has a significant impact on how people perceive and interact with each other. In the context of oncology, it is essential that language reflects respect, compassion, and understanding. The following sections detail the key aspects of accessible and respectful language.
Use Person-First Language
Person-First Language emphasizes the individual, not their diagnosis. It reminds us that a person is more than their illness. By placing the person before the condition, healthcare providers can help reduce the tendency to define people by their diseases. For example, using “person with lung cancer” instead of “lung cancer patient” or “person who smokes” instead of “smoker” encourages a more empathetic and respectful way of referring to individuals. Likewise, referring to a “person with a history of tobacco use” instead of a “tobacco user” helps avoid labeling and reduces stigma.
Eliminate Blame Language
Historically, medical language has been rooted in a tradition that can sometimes feel judgmental or accusatory. Modern communication in healthcare needs to evolve to be more compassionate and non-judgmental. For example, replacing terms like “non-compliant” with “unable to follow treatment recommendations” shifts the tone from blame to understanding. The term “risk reduction” is preferred over “prevention” as it is more patient-centered, while “patient progressed” is a better alternative to “cancer progressed.” Similarly, reframing “patient failed treatment” to “treatment did not achieve the desired outcome” makes the communication more empathetic and less accusatory.
End Stigma
The stigmatization of people with lung cancer, particularly those with a smoking history, has been an ongoing challenge. While tobacco control policies have reduced smoking rates, they have also inadvertently contributed to stigma. The IASLC encourages language that removes judgment and promotes understanding. Referring to a “person with smoking history” instead of a “former smoker” or a “person with nicotine dependence” instead of a “nicotine addict” helps mitigate the stigma associated with smoking and emphasizes a more empathetic approach to care. Using terms such as “person who uses e-cigarettes” rather than “vaper” also helps reduce stigma and promote a more neutral, non-judgmental tone.
Equity in Language
Equity in language is essential for promoting diversity, inclusion, and cultural sensitivity. It is important to practice cultural humility and sensitivity when describing individuals from various racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic backgrounds. The IASLC strongly advocates for using inclusive language that reflects the diversity of the global population affected by lung cancer. This helps ensure that all individuals are respected and treated with dignity, regardless of their background or identity.
Section 2: Acronyms and Abbreviations in Scientific Writing
The use of acronyms and abbreviations is common in scientific and medical communication, particularly in research abstracts and presentations. While they serve to reduce redundancy and improve clarity, it is important that they do not compromise the person-first language approach.
Purpose of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronyms and abbreviations, when used thoughtfully, can streamline communication, especially in environments with word-count limitations. However, they must always be clearly defined and used consistently to avoid confusion or dehumanization. Thoughtful use of abbreviations ensures that language remains inclusive and understandable, even when brevity is necessary.
Key Considerations for Using Abbreviations
When using abbreviations, always spell out the full term followed by the acronym in parentheses on the first use. For example, “The clinical trial included a person with no smoking history (PNSH).” When writing for a non-specialist or patient-facing audience, provide simple definitions to enhance understanding. Additionally, when appropriate, include a glossary in longer documents to ensure clarity for all audiences. It is important to tailor the use of abbreviations to the audience’s level of understanding, ensuring that technical language is accessible and does not create confusion.
Recommended Person-First Abbreviations
To maintain the focus on the person rather than their behavior or diagnosis, the IASLC recommends the use of specific person-first abbreviations. These abbreviations can be used in situations with strict word-count limits, such as abstracts or conference presentations. The goal is to maintain the integrity of the communication while respecting the individual. Examples of recommended person-first abbreviations include “PNSH” for “Person with No Smoking History” and “PUEC” for “Person who Uses E-Cigarettes.” These abbreviations allow oncologists and researchers to communicate effectively while respecting the person at the center of the research.
Stay tuned for more updates on OncoDaily
Written by Nare Hovhannisyan, MD