Promoting Diversity through an Understanding of Barriers and Drivers for Inclusive Clinical Trials.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science Pub Date : 2025-02-26 DOI:10.1007/s43441-025-00751-9
Annick de Bruin, Jasmine Masullo, Shalome Sine, Kenneth Getz
{"title":"Promoting Diversity through an Understanding of Barriers and Drivers for Inclusive Clinical Trials.","authors":"Annick de Bruin, Jasmine Masullo, Shalome Sine, Kenneth Getz","doi":"10.1007/s43441-025-00751-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Racially and ethnically diverse, equitable representation among clinical trial participants is important for enhancing the drug development process and promoting equitable healthcare outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To understand the barriers and drivers for inclusive clinical trials, focusing on the attitudes, perceptions, experiences, and challenges faced by underrepresented populations.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>An online questionnaire was administered online from April to June 2023 and involved 12,017 respondents from 54 countries. This survey utilized a convenience sampling strategy. Statistical analysis was performed to compare responses among racial and ethnic groups.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study was conducted globally. Survey respondents were recruited through various patient recruitment organizations, patient advocacy groups, and contract research organizations.</p><p><strong>Respondents: </strong>Adults 18 years or older who received an email or had online access were eligible to participate. Racial and ethnic composition included White (81%), Hispanic/Latino (15%), Black/African American (6%), Asian (6%), and other ethnicities.</p><p><strong>Exposure(s): </strong>Respondents were asked about their perceptions, concerns and experiences related to clinical research access and participation.</p><p><strong>Main outcome(s) and measure(s): </strong>Key outcomes included barriers to clinical research participation, factors influencing trust in pharmaceutical companies and past experiences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Barriers to clinical research participation varied among ethnic groups. Asian respondents cited concerns about time off work (22%) and time required to participate (19%) more frequently as compared to White respondents (7% and 7%, respectively; p < 0.05). Hispanics expressed higher concerns about time off work (15%) and receiving placebo (10%) as compared to Non-Hispanics (8% and 5%, respectively, p < 0.05). Black and Hispanic respondents placed higher importance on diversity in staff compared to White and non-Hispanic respondents (B: 32%; W: 12%; Hispanic: 22%; Non-Hispanic: 13% p < 0.05). Black, Asian, and Hispanic respondents reported higher levels of disruption in participation related to technology use (Black: 31%; Hispanic: 30%; Asian: 29%) and completing study requirements at home (Black: 32%; Hispanic: 30%; Asian: 26%) as compared to White (13%, 15%; p < 0.05%) and non-Hispanic respondents (14%, 17%; p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings highlight the need to address barriers to diversity in clinical trials and improve trial experiences of underrepresented communities, facilitating design of more inclusive and patient-centered trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-025-00751-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Racially and ethnically diverse, equitable representation among clinical trial participants is important for enhancing the drug development process and promoting equitable healthcare outcomes.

Objective: To understand the barriers and drivers for inclusive clinical trials, focusing on the attitudes, perceptions, experiences, and challenges faced by underrepresented populations.

Design: An online questionnaire was administered online from April to June 2023 and involved 12,017 respondents from 54 countries. This survey utilized a convenience sampling strategy. Statistical analysis was performed to compare responses among racial and ethnic groups.

Setting: The study was conducted globally. Survey respondents were recruited through various patient recruitment organizations, patient advocacy groups, and contract research organizations.

Respondents: Adults 18 years or older who received an email or had online access were eligible to participate. Racial and ethnic composition included White (81%), Hispanic/Latino (15%), Black/African American (6%), Asian (6%), and other ethnicities.

Exposure(s): Respondents were asked about their perceptions, concerns and experiences related to clinical research access and participation.

Main outcome(s) and measure(s): Key outcomes included barriers to clinical research participation, factors influencing trust in pharmaceutical companies and past experiences.

Results: Barriers to clinical research participation varied among ethnic groups. Asian respondents cited concerns about time off work (22%) and time required to participate (19%) more frequently as compared to White respondents (7% and 7%, respectively; p < 0.05). Hispanics expressed higher concerns about time off work (15%) and receiving placebo (10%) as compared to Non-Hispanics (8% and 5%, respectively, p < 0.05). Black and Hispanic respondents placed higher importance on diversity in staff compared to White and non-Hispanic respondents (B: 32%; W: 12%; Hispanic: 22%; Non-Hispanic: 13% p < 0.05). Black, Asian, and Hispanic respondents reported higher levels of disruption in participation related to technology use (Black: 31%; Hispanic: 30%; Asian: 29%) and completing study requirements at home (Black: 32%; Hispanic: 30%; Asian: 26%) as compared to White (13%, 15%; p < 0.05%) and non-Hispanic respondents (14%, 17%; p < 0.05).

Conclusions: The findings highlight the need to address barriers to diversity in clinical trials and improve trial experiences of underrepresented communities, facilitating design of more inclusive and patient-centered trials.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
期刊最新文献
The Beginning of a "Regulatory Renaissance": Positioning Regulatory Coverage at the Interface of Human Expertise and Digital Support. Developing a Set of AI Ethics Principles to Shape Ethical Behavior in Drug Development. An Evaluation of Time Spent Completing Electronically Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials. Regulatory, Translational, and Operational Considerations for the Incorporation of Biomarkers in Drug Development. A Proposed Confidence Ellipse Approach for Benefit-Risk Assessment in Clinical Trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1