Opportunities to Increase Science of Diversity and Inclusion in Clinical Trials: Equity and a Lack of a Control

Author:

Igwe Joseph‐Kevin123ORCID,Wangdak Yuthok Tenzin Yeshi1ORCID,Cruz Erin1ORCID,Mueller Adrienne1ORCID,Lan Roy Hao1,Brown‐Johnson Cati1ORCID,Idris Muhammed2ORCID,Rodriguez Fatima1ORCID,Clark Kira1ORCID,Palaniappan Latha1ORCID,Echols Melvin2ORCID,Wang Paul1ORCID,Onwuanyi Anekwe2,Pemu Priscilla2ORCID,Lewis Eldrin F.1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Medicine Stanford University, School of Medicine Stanford CA

2. Department of Medicine Morehouse School of Medicine Atlanta GA

3. American Heart Association Strategically Focused Research Network on the Science of Diversity in Clinical Trials Research Fellow Durham NC

Abstract

The United States witnessed a nearly 4‐fold increase in personal health care expenditures between 1980 and 2010. Despite innovations and obvious benefits to health, participants enrolled in clinical trials still do not accurately represent the racial and ethnic composition of patients nationally or globally. This lack of diversity in cohorts limits the generalizability and significance of results among all populations and has deep repercussions for patient equity. To advance diversity in clinical trials, robust evidence for the most effective strategies for recruitment of diverse participants is needed. A major limitation of previous literature on clinical trial diversity is the lack of control or comparator groups for different strategies. To date, interventions have focused primarily on (1) community‐based interventions, (2) institutional practices, and (3) digital health systems. This review article outlines prior intervention strategies across these 3 categories and considers health policy and ethical incentives for substantiation before US Food and Drug Administration approval. There are no current studies that comprehensively compare these interventions against one another. The American Heart Association Strategically Focused Research Network on the Science of Diversity in Clinical Trials represents a multicenter, collaborative network between Stanford School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine created to understand the barriers to diversity in clinical trials by contemporaneous head‐to‐head interventional strategies accessing digital, institutional, and community‐based recruitment strategies to produce informed recruitment strategies targeted to improve underrepresented patient representation in clinical trials.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Reference102 articles.

1. Improving diversity in medical research

2. Gender and Ethnic Diversity in NIMH-funded Clinical Trials: Review of a Decade of Published Research

3. Increasing Diversity in Clinical Trials: Overcoming Critical Barriers

4. Healthy City . A short guide to community based participatory action research. Advancement Project. 2011 Accessed December 20 2022. https://hc‐v6‐static.s3.amazonaws.com/media/resources/tmp/cbpar.pdf

5. Demographic diversity of participants in Pfizer sponsored clinical trials in the United States

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3