Stephanie Behringer-Massera1, Terysia Browne2, Geny George3, Sally Duran3, Andrea Cherrington4, M Diane McKee2,5. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Bone Diseases, Icahn School of Medicine, 1 Gustave L Levy Place, NY 10029, USA. 2. Department of Family & Social Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 1300 Morris Park Ave, Bronx, NY 10461, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 1300 Morris Park Ave, Bronx, NY 10461, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Alabama, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA. 5. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Ave N, Worcester, MA 10655, USA.
Abstract
Background: Recruitment of participants into research studies, especially individuals from minority groups, is challenging; lack of diversity may lead to biased findings. Aim: To explore beliefs about research participation among individuals who were approached and eligible for the GRADE study. Methods: In-depth qualitative telephone interviews with randomized participants (n = 25) and eligible individuals who declined to enroll (n = 26). Results: Refusers and consenters differed in trust and perceptions of risk, benefits and burden of participation. Few participants understood how comparative effectiveness research differed from other types of trials; however, some features of comparative effectiveness research were perceived as lower risk. Conclusion: We identified facilitators and addressable barriers to participation in research studies.
Background: Recruitment of participants into research studies, especially individuals from minority groups, is challenging; lack of diversity may lead to biased findings. Aim: To explore beliefs about research participation among individuals who were approached and eligible for the GRADE study. Methods: In-depth qualitative telephone interviews with randomized participants (n = 25) and eligible individuals who declined to enroll (n = 26). Results: Refusers and consenters differed in trust and perceptions of risk, benefits and burden of participation. Few participants understood how comparative effectiveness research differed from other types of trials; however, some features of comparative effectiveness research were perceived as lower risk. Conclusion: We identified facilitators and addressable barriers to participation in research studies.
Authors: Barbara C Tilley; Arch G Mainous; Daniel W Smith; M Diane McKee; Rossybelle P Amorrortu; Jennifer Alvidrez; Vanessa Diaz; Marvella E Ford; Maria E Fernandez; Robert A Hauser; Carlos Singer; Veronica Landa; Aron Trevino; Stacia M DeSantis; Yefei Zhang; Elvan Daniels; Derrick Tabor; Sally W Vernon Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2017-03-19 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Joseph Mfutso-Bengo; Francis Masiye; Malcolm Molyneux; Paul Ndebele; Abdullah Chilungo Journal: Malawi Med J Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 0.875
Authors: Mary E Larkin; Virginia A Capasso; Chien-Lin Chen; Ellen K Mahoney; Barbara Hazard; Enrico Cagliero; David M Nathan Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2008 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.140
Authors: Linda B Cottler; Donna Jo McCloskey; Sergio Aguilar-Gaxiola; Nancy M Bennett; Hal Strelnick; Molly Dwyer-White; Deborah E Collyar; Shaun Ajinkya; Sarena D Seifer; Catina Callahan O'Leary; Catherine W Striley; Bradley Evanoff Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-02-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: David M Nathan; John B Buse; Steven E Kahn; Heidi Krause-Steinrauf; Mary E Larkin; Myrlene Staten; Deborah Wexler; John M Lachin Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 19.112