Every order is original, expert-done, and screened for AI — full report on request.See how it works

Assignment questions
NursingEssayClinical trials

Would you join a heart disease clinical trial?

Position statement means commit. Three or four paragraphs weighing pros against cons and landing somewhere — and the historical exclusion of women from cardiovascular trials is the context that makes the decision interesting.

Editorial process

Last reviewed · August 15, 2026

01

A position statement, not a summary

The deliverable is a position statement, which means the paper has to land somewhere. Weighing pros and cons and concluding that it depends is the one outcome the format rules out, so decide first and structure the paper to defend that decision. Either answer is defensible. If you would participate, the arguments are access to treatment not otherwise available, close monitoring, contribution to knowledge, and — given the reading the assignment supplies — the specific point that women's under-representation in cardiovascular trials is only fixed by women enrolling. If you would not, the arguments are randomisation to a placebo arm in a serious condition, unknown adverse effects, the burden of visits and procedures, and the possibility that consent given while frightened is not fully free. Whichever way you go, the marks are in the reasoning, so give the strongest version of the case you reject before you reject it — an opponent you have understated is not one you have answered.

The historical material the assignment points you to is what raises this above a pros-and-cons list, so use it rather than summarising it. Women were routinely excluded from cardiovascular trials for decades, partly over concerns about pregnancy and partly from an assumption that findings in men would transfer. They did not transfer evenly: presentation, drug metabolism and outcomes differ, and treatment guidelines built on male-dominated samples were applied to women anyway. That is the reason the assignment calls heart disease the number one threat to women rather than a footnote to men's cardiac care. Bring it into your position explicitly — the exclusion history is an argument for participating, and also a reason to be careful about who is asked and how. Include at least one citation as required, and keep the whole thing to three or four paragraphs rather than letting the history crowd out your own position.

Likely learning objectives

Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.

  • 01
    Take and defend a position rather than surveying both sides.
  • 02
    Weigh the personal risks and benefits of trial participation concretely.
  • 03
    Explain how the historical exclusion of women from cardiovascular trials affects current practice.
  • 04
    Connect a population-level research problem to an individual decision.
Assignment instructionsQuoted verbatim

Read the full question

Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.

Discussion Participating in Heart Disease Clinical Trial Discussion: Participating in Heart Disease Clinical Trial 3 paragraphs due in 24 hours. Overview: Develop a position statement regarding whether you would consider participating in a clinical trial related to heart disease. Simply look at the pros and cons to determine which would persuade your decision and write 3-4 paragraphs to defend your position. Be sure to include at least one citation to support your work. Breakdown: Heart Disease Assignment Review the following websites to gain an understanding of the #1 threat to women: http://www.consultant360.com/content/heart-disease-women https://www.yourethecure.org/ Explore You’re the Cure to gain better understanding. Review the booklet: http://www.healthyheartsforwomen.com/whd/#/1 with close review of page 31. Read the following to become more aware of the historical disparity in clinical trial that have likely had impact ;on the diagnosing and treatment of heart disease in women. Women make up just over half the US population and should not be considered a special, minority population, but rather an equal gender whose health needs require equal research efforts as those for men. Historically, however, the health needs of women, apart from reproductive concerns, have lagged in medical research. In 1985, the Public Health Service Task Force on Women’s Health Issues concluded that “the historical lack of research focus on women’s health concerns has compromised the quality of health information available to women as well as the health care they receive.” Since the publication of that report, there has been a transformation in women’s health research—including changes in government support of research, in policies, in regulations, and in organization—that has resulted in the generation of new scientific knowledge about women’s health. Offices on women’s health have been established in a number of government agencies.1Government reports and reports from other organizations, including the Institute of Medicine (IOM), have highlighted the need for, and tracked the progress of, the inclusion of women in health research. A number of nongovernment organizations have also provided leadership in research in women’s health. And women as advocates, research subjects, researchers, clinicians, administrators, and US representatives and senators have played a major role in building a women’s health movement. A number of non-governmental organizations have also provided leadership in research in women’s health. And women as advocates, research subjects, researchers, clinicians, administrators, and US representatives and senators have played a major role in building a women’s health movement. Institute Of Medicine, Committee on Women’s Health Research (2010). Women’s Health Research: Progress, Pitfalls, and Promises. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12908&page=1. 4. Review: http://www.fda.gov/forpatients/clinicaltrials/default.htm then develop a position statement regarding whether you would consider participating in a clinical trial related to heart disease. Simply look at the pros and cons to determine which would persuade your decision and write 3-4 paragraphs to defend your position. Be sure to include at least one citation to support your work. Discussion: Participating in Heart Disease Clinical Trial.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question

Important information for writing discussion questions and participation Hi Class, Discussion Participating in Heart Disease Clinical Trial Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts. Contact me if you have any questions. Important information on Writing a Discussion Question Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references) There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article. Include in-text citations in your response Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information Follow APA-7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week. Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references) Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count. Follow APA 7th edition Points will be deducted if the above is not followed Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points. Here are some helpful links Student paper example Citing Sources The Writing Center is a great resource Welcome to class Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to. I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you. Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted. If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations. Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements. Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week. I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!

02

Turn the brief into deliverables

  1. 01
    A three- to four-paragraph position statement with a clear stance.
  2. 02
    Pros and cons weighed, with a stated reason for the decision.
  3. 03
    Explicit use of the historical exclusion material.
  4. 04
    At least one citation supporting the work.
03

Position, pros, cons, then the exclusion history

01

State the position

Say whether you would participate and preview the reason.

02

The case for participating

Access, monitoring, contribution to knowledge, and correcting under-representation.

03

The case against

Placebo randomisation, unknown effects, burden, and the pressure on consent.

04

The exclusion history and your decision

Use the historical disparity to explain why the decision matters beyond you.

04

Sources on women's representation in trials

Recommended databases

  • The websites supplied in the assignment
  • PubMed Central
  • U.S. Food and Drug Administration women's health resources
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

Search sequence

  1. 1.
    Read the supplied sites first, since the assignment builds the argument from them.
  2. 2.
    Search for evidence on sex differences in cardiovascular presentation and drug response, which is what makes exclusion consequential.
  3. 3.
    Look for current data on women's enrolment in cardiovascular trials, so the historical claim has a present-day figure attached.
  4. 4.
    Find one source that argues the opposite of your position, to make the counter-argument section fair.
05

Reference shortlist

These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.

Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.

  1. 01

    Women in Clinical Trials

    U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2024

    The regulator's own account of women's participation and the policy history, which is the assignment's central context.

  2. 02

    Proceedings from the scientific symposium: Sex differences in cardiovascular disease

    Journal of Women's Health · 2010

    Documents the sex differences in cardiovascular disease that made exclusion consequential rather than merely unfair.

  3. 03

    Sex differences in trial representation and the cardiovascular effectiveness of glucose-lowering therapies

    Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism · 2026

    Recent evidence that trial representation still shapes what is known about treatment effectiveness by sex.

  4. 04

    Heart-Healthy Living - What Is Heart-Healthy Living?

    National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute · 2024

    Institute-level context on cardiovascular risk, useful for the scale claim the assignment opens with.

06

Review before submission

Common mistakes

  • Concluding that it depends, which is the one outcome a position statement excludes.
  • Summarising the supplied readings instead of using them as arguments.
  • Treating the exclusion history as background rather than as a reason bearing on the decision.
  • Writing about clinical trials generally rather than about heart disease.
  • Omitting the citation the brief requires.

Submission checklist

  • Does the paper state a position in the first paragraph?
  • Are both pros and cons addressed before the conclusion?
  • Have you used the historical exclusion material as an argument?
  • Is it three to four paragraphs?
  • Is at least one source cited?

Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by

Aaron Bishop

MA, Education

assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines

Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by

Dr. Nathan Cole

PhD, Rhetoric & Composition

Argumentation and thesis development

Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.

Want feedback on your plan before you draft?

Get help interpreting the brief, checking your evidence strategy, and strengthening your outline while keeping the work your own.

Get assignment guidance
Start your order