Literature DB >> 19183095

Beliefs of women's risk as research subjects: a four-city study examining differences by sex and by race/ethnicity.

Stefanie L Russell1, Ralph V Katz, Nancy R Kressin, B Lee Green, Min Qi Wang, Cristina Claudio, Krassimira Tzvetkova.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Given the history of vulnerability of women of childbearing age to medical treatments that have caused injury, for example, diethylstilbestrol (DES) and thalidomide, it is surprising that, to date, little research has directly examined attitudes of the general public regarding the vulnerability of women when they participate in biomedical research studies.
METHODS: We asked three questions about beliefs of women as biomedical research subjects of 623 white, 353 black, and 157 Hispanic people in four U.S. cities: (1) Do you believe that women are more likely to be "taken advantage of" when they become subjects in a medical research project as compared to men? (2) Do you believe that women of childbearing age (15-45-year-olds) should become study participants in medical research projects? and, if the response was no or don't know/not sure, (3) Would you still say no or don't know/not sure to question 2 even if it meant that we would not know anything about the health and medical treatments for women aged 15-45 years?
RESULTS: Overall, women were 60% more likely than men to state that women were more likely than men to be "taken advantage of," even when controlling for potential confounders, and both black and Hispanic participants were much more likely than white participants to state that this was the case. The majority of respondents (57.4%) said that women of childbearing age should not be research subjects; among women, both black and Hispanic people were less likely than white people to change their minds when prompted that this might mean that "nothing would be known about the health and medical treatments for women aged 15-45 years."
CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of the participants reported knowledge of historical events, and this knowledge was related, particularly in black participants, to attitudes toward vulnerability of women as biomedical research subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19183095      PMCID: PMC2723759          DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2007.0486

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)        ISSN: 1540-9996            Impact factor:   2.681


  28 in total

1.  Promoting the participation of minorities in research.

Authors:  Mandy Garber; Robert M Arnold
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 11.229

2.  Wanted: women in clinical trials.

Authors:  Viviana Simon
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-06-10       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  The impact of socioeconomic status and race on trial participation for older women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Cary P Gross; Giovanni Filardo; Susan T Mayne; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 4.  Adherence to federal guidelines for reporting of sex and race/ethnicity in clinical trials.

Authors:  Stacie E Geller; Marci Goldstein Adams; Molly Carnes
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Considerations in recruiting underscreened women to focus groups on screening for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Katherine M Wilson; Carlyn E Orians
Journal:  Health Promot Pract       Date:  2005-10

6.  Participation of Asian-American women in cancer treatment research: a pilot study.

Authors:  Tung T Nguyen; Carol P Somkin; Yifei Ma; Lei-Chun Fung; Thoa Nguyen
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2005

7.  African Americans and participation in clinical trials: differences in beliefs and attitudes by gender.

Authors:  R BeLue; K D Taylor-Richardson; J Lin; A T Rivera; D Grandison
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2006-08-10       Impact factor: 2.226

Review 8.  Why are African Americans under-represented in medical research studies? Impediments to participation.

Authors:  V L Shavers-Hornaday; C F Lynch; L F Burmeister; J C Torner
Journal:  Ethn Health       Date:  1997 Mar-Jun       Impact factor: 2.772

Review 9.  Female gender as a risk factor for drug-induced cardiac arrhythmias: evaluation of clinical and experimental evidence.

Authors:  S N Ebert; X K Liu; R L Woosley
Journal:  J Womens Health       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 10.  Are racial and ethnic minorities less willing to participate in health research?

Authors:  David Wendler; Raynard Kington; Jennifer Madans; Gretchen Van Wye; Heidi Christ-Schmidt; Laura A Pratt; Otis W Brawley; Cary P Gross; Ezekiel Emanuel
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-12-06       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  3 in total

1.  The case for Eliminating Disparities in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Daniel Goldberg
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Identifying the "vulnerables" in biomedical research: the vox populis from the Tuskegee Legacy Project.

Authors:  Christopher T Chiu; Ralph V Katz
Journal:  J Public Health Dent       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.821

3.  Recruitment and retention of women in a large randomized control trial to reduce repeat preterm births: the Philadelphia Collaborative Preterm Prevention Project.

Authors:  David A Webb; James C Coyne; Robert L Goldenberg; Vijaya K Hogan; Irma T Elo; Joan R Bloch; Leny Mathew; Ian M Bennett; Erika F Dennis; Jennifer F Culhane
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 4.615

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.