Anita Kurt1,2, Lauren Semler3, Matthew Meyers3, Bernadette G Porter3, Jeanne L Jacoby3, Brian Stello4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine Research, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, USA. Anita.Kurt@lvhn.org. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine Research, Lehigh Valley Health Network, 2545 Schoenersville Road, 4th Floor, Bethlehem, 18017, USA. Anita.Kurt@lvhn.org. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine Research, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, USA. 4. Department of Family Medicine, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate research professionals' perspectives regarding minority participation in clinical trials. METHODS: A web-based survey of research professionals at US institutions receiving NIH and/or AHRQ funding to conduct clinical research in 2013. Descriptive statistics, mean, standard deviation (SD), and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were utilized for analysis. RESULTS: Distributed were 13,041 surveys with 967 (7.4%) responses. Overall and race-stratified analyses included 633 and 521 surveys, respectively. A majority agreed that patients' race (mean, 3.4; SD = 1.0) and primary language (mean, 4.0; SD = 0.9) have an effect on enrollment. They had more success in enrolling those whose primary language was the same as their own (mean, 3.8; SD = 1.0), and that a language barrier and time spent arranging for interpreters had prevented them from offering a study to potential candidates (mean, 3.2; SD = 1.2). Non-Caucasian respondents were more likely to agree that "fear of unknown side effects" was a deterrent for minorities (p < 0.01), "minorities are more likely to be unavailable for follow-up phone calls" (p = 0.07), and "the unavailability of translated material discourages non-English speakers from participation" (p = 0.08). They also were more likely to be neutral or agree with being discouraged from enrolling minorities because of the possibility of their withdrawal or being less likely to be available for phone follow-ups and follow-up visits (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite a few subtle racial differences in research professionals' perspectives, a majority expressed no hesitation in enrolling minorities. Patients' race and primary language appeared to influence enrollment. A language barrier appeared to be the strongest barrier for research professionals.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate research professionals' perspectives regarding minority participation in clinical trials. METHODS: A web-based survey of research professionals at US institutions receiving NIH and/or AHRQ funding to conduct clinical research in 2013. Descriptive statistics, mean, standard deviation (SD), and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were utilized for analysis. RESULTS: Distributed were 13,041 surveys with 967 (7.4%) responses. Overall and race-stratified analyses included 633 and 521 surveys, respectively. A majority agreed that patients' race (mean, 3.4; SD = 1.0) and primary language (mean, 4.0; SD = 0.9) have an effect on enrollment. They had more success in enrolling those whose primary language was the same as their own (mean, 3.8; SD = 1.0), and that a language barrier and time spent arranging for interpreters had prevented them from offering a study to potential candidates (mean, 3.2; SD = 1.2). Non-Caucasian respondents were more likely to agree that "fear of unknown side effects" was a deterrent for minorities (p < 0.01), "minorities are more likely to be unavailable for follow-up phone calls" (p = 0.07), and "the unavailability of translated material discourages non-English speakers from participation" (p = 0.08). They also were more likely to be neutral or agree with being discouraged from enrolling minorities because of the possibility of their withdrawal or being less likely to be available for phone follow-ups and follow-up visits (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite a few subtle racial differences in research professionals' perspectives, a majority expressed no hesitation in enrolling minorities. Patients' race and primary language appeared to influence enrollment. A language barrier appeared to be the strongest barrier for research professionals.
Entities:
Keywords:
Barriers to clinical trial enrollment; Influencing factors; Motivators for clinical trial enrollment; Racial disparities in research; Research professionals; Researchers’ perspective
Authors: Raegan W Durant; Roger B Davis; Diane Marie M St George; Ishan Canty Williams; Connie Blumenthal; Giselle M Corbie-Smith Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2007-05-25 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Joel B Braunstein; Noëlle S Sherber; Steven P Schulman; Eric L Ding; Neil R Powe Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Raegan W Durant; Jennifer A Wenzel; Isabel C Scarinci; Debora A Paterniti; Mona N Fouad; Thelma C Hurd; Michelle Y Martin Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Anita Kurt; Hope Kincaid; Lauren Semler; Jeanne L Jacoby; Melanie B Johnson; Beth A Careyva; Brian Stello; Timothy Friel; John C Smulian; Mark C Knouse Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2017-12-26
Authors: Wayne Batchelor; David E Kandzari; Scott Davis; Luis Tami; John C Wang; Islam Othman; Osvaldo S Gigliotti; Amir Haghighat; Sarabjeet Singh; Mario Lopez; Gregory Giugliano; Phillip A Horwitz; Jaya Chandrasekhar; Paul Underwood; Craig A Thompson; Roxana Mehran Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Soumya J Niranjan; Jennifer A Wenzel; Michelle Y Martin; Mona N Fouad; Selwyn M Vickers; Badrinath R Konety; Raegan W Durant Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-05