Research Professionals' Perspectives, Barriers, and Recommendations Regarding Minority Participation in Clinical Trials

"How Fluent Do I Need to Be to Say I'm Fluent?" Research Experiences of Communities that Speak Languages Other than English

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to partner with community organizations to understand the research experiences of communities who speak languages other than English (LOE).

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews in Spanish, Nepali, Mandarin, French, or Kizigua with LOE community members and community leaders who completed recruitment and data collection. Audio-recordings of the interviews were transcribed and translated. We conducted qualitative coding using a mixed deductive-inductive analysis approach and thematic analyses using three rounds of affinity clustering. This study occurred in partnership with an established community-academic collaboration.

RESULTS

Thirty community members and six community leaders were interviewed. 83% of LOE participants were born outside of the US and most participants (63%) had never participated in a prior research study. Six themes emerged from this work. Many participants did not understand the concept of research, but those that did thought that inclusion of LOE communities is critical for equity. Even when research was understood as a concept, it was often inaccessible to LOE individuals, particularly because of the lack of language services. When LOE participants engaged in research, they did not always understand their participation. Participants thought that improving research trust was essential and recommended partnering with community organizations and disseminating research results to the community.

CONCLUSION

This study's results can serve as an important foundation for researchers seeking to include LOE communities in future research to be more inclusive and scientifically rigorous.

Representation of Hispanic Patients in Clinical Trials for Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Hispanic individuals comprise one-fifth of the U.S. population and Hispanic patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) experience higher odds of death compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Representation of Hispanic patients in clinical trials for respiratory failure is critical to address this inequity. We conducted a systematic review to examine the inclusion of Hispanic patients in randomized controlled trials for AHRF and assessed language as a potential barrier to enrollment.

DATA SOURCES

National Library of Medicine PubMed, Elsevier Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases through January 2024.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials assessing AHRF interventions enrolling U.S. patients receiving mechanical ventilation, noninvasive mechanical ventilation, or high-flow nasal cannula were included. The systematic review was registered prospectively through PROSPERO (CRD42023437828).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently screened studies and extracted data for each included study.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ninety-four trials published from 1975 to 2023 were included; 33.0% (n = 31) of studies reported ethnicity, and 11.2% of participants in studies reporting race or ethnicity (1,320/11,780) were identified as Hispanic. The proportion of Hispanic-identified participants was significantly lower than the U.S. Hispanic population from 1996 to 2019 (p < 0.01). Starting in 2020, the proportion of Hispanic-identified participants was significantly higher than the U.S. population (27.8% vs. 19.1%; p < 0.01). Two studies (4.9%) reporting race or ethnicity excluded non-English speaking participants; the remainder did not specify language requirements for enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

Hispanic-identified individuals were underrepresented in trials for AHRF until 2020 when Hispanic patient representation increased during COVID-19. Exclusion of participants who do not speak English may represent a barrier to trial enrollment.

Patient participation in clinical trials conducted by principal investigators who speak one or more language(s) beyond english: Exploring ethnicity as proxy for language

Background

To explore the association between ethnicity, as a proxy for language, and participation in clinical trials (CT) conducted by Principal Investigators (PI) who speak one or more language in addition to English.

Methods

This retrospective, descriptive study utilized CT participant demographic data extracted from the largest Midwestern non-profit healthcare system between January 1, 2019 and 12/31/2021. The CT participant sample (N = 4308) was divided for comparison: CT Participants of Hispanic or Latino Origin (N = 254; 5.90 %) and CT Participants of Non-Hispanic or Latino Origin (N = 4054; 94.10 %). Logistic regressions were performed to generate the crude and adjusted odds of patients of Hispanic or Latino origin participating in CTs conducted by PIs who speak another language in addition to English.

Results

Crude analysis revealed that patients of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity had 2.04 (1.58, 2.64) times greater odds of participating in CTs conducted by PIs who speak another language than English (<0.0001), which increased to 2.67 (1.97, 3.62) times greater odds after adjusting for sex, race, age and insurance (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Overall findings indicate that patients of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, who are more likely to speak Spanish, have greater odds of participating in CTs conducted by PIs who speak another language beyond English. This may imply that cultural sensitivity at the top of a CT study team, as likely to be demonstrated by PIs who speak another language beyond English, may be an important contributor to reducing ethnicity- and language-based barriers to diversity in CTs and a relationship worth exploring further.

Creating Culturally Adapted Multilingual Materials for Research

Patients who speak languages other than English are frequently excluded from research. This exclusion exacerbates inequities, biases results, and may violate federal regulations and research ethics. Language justice is the right to communicate in an individual's preferred language to address power imbalances and promote equity. To promote language justice in research, we propose a method to translate and culturally-adapt multifaceted research materials into multiple languages simultaneously. Our method involves a multistep approach, including professional translation, review by bilingual expert panels to refine and reach consensus, and piloting or cognitive interviews with patients and families. Key differences from other translation approaches (eg, the World Health Organization) include omitting back-translation, given its limited utility in identifying translation challenges, and limiting expert panelist and piloting-participant numbers for feasibility. We detail a step-by-step approach to operationalizing this method and outline key considerations learned after utilizing this method to translate materials into 8 languages other than English for an ongoing multicenter pediatric research study on family safety-reporting. Materials included family brochures, surveys, and intervention materials. This approach took ∼6 months overall at a cost of <$2000 per language (not including study personnel costs). Key themes across the project included (1) tailor scope to timeline, budget, and resources, (2) thoughtfully design English source materials, (3) identify and apply guiding principles throughout the translation and editing process, and (4) carefully review content and formatting to account for nuances across multiple languages. This method balances feasibility and rigor in translating participant-facing materials into multiple languages simultaneously, advancing language justice in research.

Trial Participation and Outcomes Among English-Speaking and Spanish-Speaking Patients With Appendicitis Randomized to Antibiotics: A Secondary Analysis of the CODA Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Spanish-speaking participants are underrepresented in clinical trials, limiting study generalizability and contributing to ongoing health inequity. The Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) trial intentionally included Spanish-speaking participants.

Objective

To describe trial participation and compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes among Spanish-speaking and English-speaking participants with acute appendicitis randomized to antibiotics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This study is a secondary analysis of the CODA trial, a pragmatic randomized trial comparing antibiotic therapy with appendectomy in adult patients with imaging-confirmed appendicitis enrolled at 25 centers across the US from May 1, 2016, to February 28, 2020. The trial was conducted in English and Spanish. All 776 participants randomized to antibiotics are included in this analysis. The data were analyzed from November 15, 2021, through August 24, 2022.

Intervention

Randomization to a 10-day course of antibiotics or appendectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Trial participation, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire scores (higher scores indicating a better health status), rate of appendectomy, treatment satisfaction, decisional regret, and days of work missed. Outcomes are also reported for a subset of participants that were recruited from the 5 sites with a large proportion of Spanish-speaking participants.

Results

Among eligible patients 476 of 1050 Spanish speakers (45%) and 1076 of 3982 of English speakers (27%) consented, comprising the 1552 participants who underwent 1:1 randomization (mean age, 38.0 years; 976 male [63%]). Of the 776 participants randomized to antibiotics, 238 were Spanish speaking (31%). Among Spanish speakers randomized to antibiotics, the rate of appendectomy was 22% (95% CI, 17%-28%) at 30 days and 45% (95% CI, 38%-52%) at 1 year, while in English speakers, these rates were 20% (95% CI, 16%-23%) at 30 days and 42% (95% CI 38%-47%) at 1 year. Mean EQ-5D scores were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92-0.95) among Spanish speakers and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.91-0.93) among English speakers. Symptom resolution at 30 days was reported by 68% (95% CI, 61%-74%) of Spanish speakers and 69% (95% CI, 64%-73%) of English speakers. Spanish speakers missed 6.69 (95% CI, 5.51-7.87) days of work on average, while English speakers missed 3.76 (95% CI, 3.20-4.32) days. Presentation to the emergency department or urgent care, hospitalization, treatment dissatisfaction, and decisional regret were low for both groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

A high proportion of Spanish speakers participated in the CODA trial. Clinical and most patient-reported outcomes were similar for English- and Spanish-speaking participants treated with antibiotics. Spanish speakers reported more days of missed work.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of underrepresented research participants: Perspectives of clinical research coordinators

Background

Insufficient recruitment of groups underrepresented in medical research threatens the generalizability of research findings and compounds inequity in research and medicine. In the present study, we examined barriers and facilitators to recruitment of underrepresented research participants from the perspective of clinical research coordinators (CRCs).

Methods

CRCs from one adult and one pediatric academic medical centers completed an online survey in April-May 2022. Survey topics included: participant language and translations, cultural competency training, incentives for research participation, study location, and participant research literacy. CRCs also reported their success in recruiting individuals from various backgrounds and completed an implicit bias measure.

Results

Surveys were completed by 220 CRCs. CRCs indicated that recruitment is improved by having translated study materials, providing incentives to compensate participants, and reducing the number of in-person study visits. Most CRCs had completed some form of cultural competency training, but most also felt that the training either had no effect or made them feel less confident in approaching prospective participants from backgrounds different than their own. In general, CRCs reported having greater success in recruiting prospective participants from groups that are not underrepresented in research. Results of the implicit bias measure did not indicate that bias was associated with intentions to approach a prospective participant.

Conclusions

CRCs identified several strategies to improve recruitment of underrepresented research participants, and CRC insights aligned with insights from research participants in previous work. Further research is needed to understand the impact of cultural competency training on recruitment of underrepresented research participants.

Inclusion of Non-English-Speaking Participants in Pediatric Health Research: A Review

Importance

The inclusion of non-English-speaking (NES) participants in pediatric research is an essential step to improving health equity for these populations. Although some studies have shown lack of progress in NES research participation in the past decade, few have examined NES inclusivity in pediatric research or details about the practices that researchers have used to communicate with NES participants.

Objective

To assess how frequently NES families were included in pediatric research, how rates of inclusion changed over time, what languages were included, and methodological details about oral and written communication with NES participants.

Evidence Review

In this review, all original investigation articles published in JAMA Pediatrics, Pediatrics, and The Journal of Pediatrics between January 2012 and November 2021 were screened. Eligible articles, which included those based in the US and with human participants, were reviewed to determine whether they included or excluded NES participants or whether or not there was specific mention of language. A second-round review was conducted on the subset of articles that included NES participants to determine methodological details (eg, languages included, type of study, region where the study was located, and oral and written communication practices with NES participants).

Findings

Of the 8142 articles screened, 5008 (62%) met inclusion criteria; of these, 469 (9%) included NES participants. The most common language was Spanish (350 [75%]); 145 articles (31%) reported non-English or other language without specification. A total of 230 articles (49%) reported the number of NES participants, and 61 (13%) specified the methods used to determine whether participants preferred a language other than English. In all, 101 (22%) and 136 (29%) articles specified how oral and written communication occurred with NES participants, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

This review of 3 pediatric journals provides preliminary evidence suggesting exclusion of NES communities from pediatric research from 2012 to 2021 and highlights an opportunity to provide more methodological detail about communication with NES participants. Best practices for improving inclusivity of NES participants are needed to guide researchers toward improved methods and more relevant results.

DEI co-mentoring circles for clinical research professionals: A pilot project and toolkit

Background

There have been a number of federal policies and guidance's impacting diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEI) in clinical research. While these are needed, they have not diminished the gaps related to clinical trial recruitment, research professional's capacity for cultural competence, and clinical research professional role development. Mentoring and co-mentoring circles have traditionally been used in Medicine, but until now had not been used for workforce development of clinical research professionals (CRPs).

Materials/Methods

We designed a six-session, monthly co-mentoring circle to take place at two academic medical centers to pilot an interinstitutional co-mentoring circle centered on storytelling videos of Black Voices in Clinical Research. This provided a DEI framework for discussions on role experiences, cultural competence, and role progression.

Results

Seven CRPs completed the DRC pilot. The participants positively evaluated the experience and made recommendations for future iterations. Discussion: Co-mentoring circles can be useful tools to connect CRPs across complex research medical centers and provide support that may have a positive impact on role satisfaction and retention.

Conclusion

This framework for developing co-mentoring circles can serve as a toolkit for future CRP co-mentoring circles within and across institutions for workforce development. The Black Voices in Clinical Research storytelling videos provide a rich foundation for future discussion on DEI issues for CRPs and collaborating with participants.

Global Investigative Site Personnel Diversity and Its Relationship with Study Participant Diversity

Background

There is little to no empirical data on the race and ethnicity of the global community of professionals conducting clinical trials funded by pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and little empirical evidence on the relationship between the race and ethnicity of investigative site personnel and the overall and corresponding diversity of participants enrolled.

Methods

A global online survey conducted in mid-2021 gathered responses from 3462 clinical research professionals representing approximately 3300 distinct investigative sites.

Results

Worldwide, including all research settings, the majority (64%) of investigative site personnel are White, 20% are LatinX, 6% are Black, 7% are Asian and 3% are other races and ethnicities (e.g., indigenous peoples, Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern, etc.). The representation of non-white site personnel is significantly higher in North America and Rest of World (ROW) compared to Europe. The highest levels of personnel diversity are found in private community-based practices, investigative sites and site networks. A significant correlation (p < 0.001) was found between site personnel diversity and patient enrollment diversity worldwide. As the mix of site personnel by race and ethnicity increases, the diversity of patients enrolled—except for Asian patients in sites outside of North America—also increases. A significant relationship was also found between the proportion of a given race or ethnicity of investigative site personnel and the corresponding race and ethnicity of patients enrolled.

Conclusions

An opportunity exists to address under-representation in clinical trials through identifying, hiring and supporting investigative site personnel to best reflect the patient communities that they serve.

Perceived Institutional Barriers Among Clinical and Research Professionals: Minority Participation in Oncology Clinical Trials

PURPOSE

In general, participation rates in cancer clinical trials are very low. However, participation rates are especially low among the socially disadvantaged and racial and ethnic minority groups. These groups have been historically under-represented in cancer clinical trials. Although many patient-related barriers have been studied, institutional factors that are essential for building clinical research infrastructure around the clinical trial enterprise in academic medical centers have been underexplored.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We assessed perspectives of cancer center professional stakeholders on the institutional factors that can potentially influence racial and ethnic minority recruitment for cancer clinical trials. Ninety-one qualitative interviews were conducted at five US cancer centers among four stakeholder groups: cancer center leaders, principal investigators, referring clinicians, and research staff. Qualitative analyses examined response data focused on institutional factors related to minority recruitment for cancer clinical trials.

RESULTS

Four prominent themes emerged regarding institutional barriers among clinical and research professionals. (1) There are no existing programs currently being used to recruit or retain minorities to clinical trials. (2) Institutional efforts are needed to increase trial participation and are not specific to potential minority participants. (3) Access to cancer clinical trials and navigation within an Academic Medical Center need to be simplified to better facilitate recruitment of minority patients. (4) Community outreach by cancer centers will increase clinical research awareness in the community.

CONCLUSION

Our research highlights the need to address institutional barriers to improve the success of minority recruitment. To increase participation among minority populations, medical centers must address mutable institutional barriers such as setting specific minority recruitment goals for cancer clinical trials, ensuring that cancer clinical trials are accessible, especially to minority patients, and supporting sustained community outreach programs to increase clinical research awareness.

Applying the Behavioural and Social Sciences Research (BSSR) Functional Framework to HIV Cure Research

INTRODUCTION

The search for an HIV cure involves important behavioural and social processes that complement the domains of biomedicine. However, the field has yet to tap into the full potential of behavioural and social sciences research (BSSR). In this article, we apply Gaist and Stirratt's BSSR Functional Framework to the field of HIV cure research.

DISCUSSION

The BSSR Functional Framework describes four key research domains: (1) basic BSSR (understanding basic behavioural and social factors), (2) elemental BSSR (advancing behavioural and social interventions), (3) supportive BSSR (strengthening biomedically focused clinical trials), and (4) integrative BSSR (building multi-disciplinary combination approaches for real-world implementation). In revisiting and applying the BSSR Functional Framework, we clarify the importance of BSSR in HIV cure research by drawing attention to such things as: how language and communication affect the meaning of "cure" to people living with HIV (PLHIV) and broader communities; how cure affects the identity and social position of PLHIV; counselling and support interventions to address the psychosocial needs and concerns of study participants related to analytical treatment interruptions (ATIs); risk reduction in the course of ATI study participation; motivation, acceptability, and decision-making processes of potential study participants related to different cure strategies; HIV care providers' perceptions and attitudes about their patients' participation in cure research; potential social harms or adverse social events associated with cure research participation; and the scalability of a proven cure strategy in the context of further advances in HIV prevention and treatment. We also discuss the BSSR Functional Framework in the context of ATIs, which involve processes at the confluence of the BSSR domains.

CONCLUSIONS

To move HIV cure regimens through the translational research pathway, attention will need to be paid to both biomedical and socio-behavioural elements. BSSR can contribute an improved understanding of the human and social dimensions related to HIV cure research and the eventual application of HIV cure regimens. The BSSR Functional Framework provides a way to identify advances, gaps and opportunities to craft an integrated, multi-disciplinary approach at all stages of cure research to ensure the real-world applicability of any strategy that shows promise.

Impact of Race Versus Education and Race Versus Income on Patients' Motivation to Participate in Clinical Trials

Our study investigates whether levels of motivation and barriers to participation in clinical trials vary with patients' education and income. A self-administered survey asked outpatients to rank potential influential factors on a "0" to "4" significance scale for their motivation to participate in clinical trials. Principal component analysis (PCA), analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests analyzed the impact of race, education, and income on their motivation to participate. Analysis included 1841 surveys; most respondents had a high school education or some college, and listed annual income < $30,000. There was a significant interaction between race and income on our motivation scale 1 scores (p = .0261). Compared with their counterparts, subjects with less education/lower income ranked monetary compensation (p = .0420 and p < .0001, respectively) as a higher motivator. Minorities and patients with less education and lower income appear to be more influenced by their desire to please the doctor, the race and sex of the doctor, and the language spoken by the doctor being the same as theirs. For all races, education appeared to have a direct relationship with motivation to participate, except for African-Americans, whose motivation appeared to decline with more education. Income appeared to have an inverse relationship with motivation to participate for all races.

Outcomes in Women and Minorities Compared With White Men 1 Year After Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation: Insights and Results From the PLATINUM Diversity and PROMUS Element Plus Post-Approval Study Pooled Analysis

Importance

There exist limited outcomes data for women and minorities after contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Objective

To examine 1-year outcomes in women and minorities vs white men after PCI with everolimus-eluting stents.

Design, Settings, and Participants

The PLATINUM Diversity study was a single-arm study enrolling women and minorities. Patient-level pooling with the PROMUS Element Plus Post-Approval Study was prespecified. Data on social determinants of health and language were collected in the PLATINUM Diversity cohort, which included 1501 patients at 52 US sites. The PROMUS Element Plus Post-Approval study enrolled 2681 patients at 52 US sites with some site overlap and included an "all-comers" population. All patients were enrolled beginning in October 2014 and were followed for 12 months. Analyses began in August 2016.

Interventions

Patients received 1 or more everolimus-eluting stent implantation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was 1-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE), which included death/myocardial infarction (MI)/target vessel revascularization. Secondary ischemic end points were also evaluated.

Results

The pooled study consisted of 4182 patients: 1635 white men (39.1%), 1863 women (white and minority) (44.5%), and 1059 minority patients (women and men) (25.3%). Women and minorities had a higher prevalence of diabetes, prior stroke, hypertension, renal disease, and congestive heart failure than white men but lower rates of multivessel disease, prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery, prior MI, and smoking. Unadjusted 1-year MACE rates (white men, 7.6%; women, 8.6%; minorities, 9.6%) were similar between groups with no significant differences after risk adjustment. The adjusted risk of death/MI was higher among women (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4) and minorities (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-2.8) compared with white men and the adjusted risk of MI was higher in minorities (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.4-4.8). These differences were driven primarily by nonstent-related MIs. Within the PLATINUM Diversity cohort, the independent predictors of MACE were cardiogenic shock, renal disease, history of peripheral vascular disease, multivessel disease, widowhood, and lack of private insurance.

Conclusions and Relevance

After contemporary everolimus-eluting stent implantation, women and minorities experience a similar risk of 1-year MACE but a higher adjusted risk of recurrent ischemic events primarily because of nonstent-related MIs. Both clinical and angiographic factors and social determinants of health, including widowhood and insurance status, contribute to 1-year MACE among women and minorities.

Underrepresentation of Hispanics and Other Minorities in Clinical Trials: Recruiters' Perspectives

Clinical trials and research studies often fail to recruit participants from the minorities, hampering the generalizability of results. In order to mitigate this problem, the present study investigated how race/ethnicity affects the process of recruiting people from racial and ethnic minority groups, by conducting 11 focus groups with professional recruiters. Several themes emerged, such as how to adapt to potential participants' language competency and literacy levels, the importance to engage in culturally appropriate verbal and non-verbal communication, and to establish a sense of homophily between recruiters and patients. In addition, recruiters pointed out possible solutions to accommodate socioeconomic concerns, to adapt to contextual factors-including immigration status-and ultimately to respond to potential participants' mistrust of medical research. These findings are discussed, and future recommendations are provided.