Who are we missing? Language exclusivity of patient‐reported outcomes in atrial fibrillation clinical trials

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionPatient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to evaluate quality of life (QoL) in Atrial Fibrillation (AF) patients, providing crucial insights in clinical trials. This study examines the frequency of PRO use in AF trials and the linguistic accessibility of AF‐specific PROs.BackgroundAs the United States becomes more multilingual, ensuring PROs are available in various languages is vital. The number of people speaking a language other than English at home has tripled from 23.1 million in 1980 to 67.8 million in 2019. This diversity necessitates the availability of PROs in multiple languages for inclusive clinical assessments.MethodsWe queried ClinicalTrials.gov for all US interventional AF trials up to November 28, 2023, reviewing each for PRO usage as primary or secondary outcomes. We identified the five most common AF‐specific and generic PROs, extracting their available translations and original languages from published sources.ResultsOf 233 identified trials, 191 had associated publications, with 180 (94.2%) conducted solely in English. Only one trial (0.4%) used an AF‐specific PRO as a primary outcome, compared to four (1.7%) with a generic PRO. Ten trials (4.3%) used AF‐specific PROs as secondary endpoints, versus 22 (9.4%) using generic PROs. AF‐specific PROs had significantly fewer translations than generic PROs (11.2 vs. 148.8; p < .001). The AF Effect on Quality‐of‐Life (AFEQT) was available in 24 languages, with limited translations in commonly spoken US languages like Arabic and Asian languages.ConclusionThe limited availability of AF‐specific PRO translations highlights a barrier to inclusive AF clinical trials. Expanding translations for AF‐specific PROs is crucial for equitable QoL assessments.