Exploring Willingness of Elder Chinese in Houston to Participate in Clinical Research

Navigating the Path to Inclusion: Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to Clinical Trial Participation Among Chinese Older Adults in the United States with Multimorbidity

CONTEXT

Older adults with multimorbidity are underrepresented in clinical trials, with enrollment of Asians particularly low.

OBJECTIVE

Understand perspectives of US Chinese older adults regarding clinical trial participation.

STUDY DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

Focus group interviews analyzed using thematic analysis.

SETTING

Community/senior centers, academic health systems in Northern and Southern California, and a nationwide registry of Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders.

POPULATION STUDIED

Mandarin- and English-speaking Chinese adults aged ≥ 65 years with multimorbidity.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Themes related to barriers and facilitators of enrollment in clinical trials of medications.

RESULTS

We conducted 12 focus groups: 7 with non-US-born and 5 with US-born Chinese older adults (n = 83 total). Mean age was 74 years (SD = 5.9), 43 (51.8%) were female, and 47 (56.6%) Mandarin-speaking. US-born participants had greater educational attainment than non-US-born participants. Participants took a mean of 6.1 prescriptions (SD = 1.5). Barriers to participation in clinical trials of medications included lack of awareness of/exposure for patients and community-based Chinese physicians, preference for natural/traditional medicine, risk aversion and safety concerns, desire for privacy, and inconvenience. Trusted influences included physicians, hospitals/health systems, Asian/Chinese community centers, and family (for non-US-born participants). Suggestions to enhance participation included using language and culturally concordant materials/personnel, educating community-based Chinese physicians about clinical trials, involving patient-trusted physicians in recruitment, promoting trials on conditions common in Chinese people or for an existing condition, and financial incentives. US-born participants expressed greater understanding and willingness to join trials. All groups attributed low clinical trial enrollment to non-US-born Chinese adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese older adults perceived obstacles to clinical trial participation that could be mitigated by involving trusted physicians in recruitment, using language and culturally concordant materials/staff, and educating patients and community-based physicians. Recognition of differences in attitudes among US- and non-US-born Chinese people may be important to tailoring recruitment strategies.

Email-Based Recruitment Into the Health eHeart Study: Cohort Analysis of Invited Eligible Patients

BACKGROUND

Web- or app-based digital health studies allow for more efficient collection of health data for research. However, remote recruitment into digital health studies can enroll nonrepresentative study samples, hindering the robustness and generalizability of findings. Through the comprehensive evaluation of an email-based campaign on recruitment into the Health eHeart Study, we aim to uncover key sociodemographic and clinical factors that contribute to enrollment.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to understand the factors related to participation, specifically regarding enrollment, in the Health eHeart Study as a result of a large-scale remote email recruitment campaign.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort analysis on all invited University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) patients to identify sociodemographic and clinical predictors of enrollment into the Health eHeart Study. The primary outcome was enrollment, defined by account registration and consent into the Health eHeart Study. The email recruitment campaign was carried out from August 2015 to February 2016, with electronic health record data extracted between September 2019 and December 2019.

RESULTS

The email recruitment campaign delivered at least 1 email invitation to 93.5% (193,606/206,983) of all invited patients and yielded a 3.6% (7012/193,606) registration rate among contacted patients and an 84.1% (5899/7012) consent rate among registered patients. Adjusted multivariate logistic regression models analyzed independent sociodemographic and clinical predictors of (1) registration among contacted participants and (2) consent among registered participants. Odds of registration were higher among patients who are older, women, non-Hispanic White, active patients with commercial insurance or Medicare, with a higher comorbidity burden, with congestive heart failure, and randomized to receive up to 2 recruitment emails. The odds of registration were lower among those with medical conditions such as dementia, chronic pulmonary disease, moderate or severe liver disease, paraplegia or hemiplegia, renal disease, or cancer. Odds of subsequent consent after initial registration were different, with an inverse trend of being lower among patients who are older and women. The odds of consent were also lower among those with peripheral vascular disease. However, the odds of consent remained higher among patients who were non-Hispanic White and those with commercial insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides important insights into the potential returns on participant enrollment when digital health study teams invest resources in using email for recruitment. The findings show that participant enrollment was driven more strongly by sociodemographic factors than clinical factors. Overall, email is an extremely efficient means of recruiting participants from a large list into the Health eHeart Study. Despite some improvements in representation, the formulation of truly diverse studies will require additional resources and strategies to overcome persistent participation barriers.

Using community-based geographical information system (GIS) to recruit older Asian Americans in an Alzheimer's disease study

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to show the usefulness of incorporating a community-based geographical information system (GIS) in recruiting research participants for the Asian Cohort for Alzheimer's Disease (ACAD) study for using the subgroup of Korean American (KA) older adults. The ACAD study is the first large study in the USA and Canada focusing on the recruitment of Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese older adults to address the issues of under-representation of Asian Americans in clinical research.

METHODS

To promote clinical research participation of racial/ethnic minority older adults with and without dementia, we used GIS by collaborating with community members to delineate boundaries for geographical clusters and enclaves of church and senior networks, and KA serving ethnic clinics. In addition, we used socioeconomic data identified as recruitment factors unique to KA older adults which was analysed for developing recruitment strategies.

RESULTS

GIS maps show a visualisation of the heterogeneity of the sociodemographic characteristics and the resources of faith-based organisations and KA serving local clinics. We addressed these factors that disproportionately affect participation in clinical research and successfully recruited the intended participants (N=60) in the proposed period.

DISCUSSION

Using GIS maps to locate KA provided innovative inroads to successful research outreach efforts for a pilot study that may be expanded to other underserved populations across the USA in the future. We will use this tool subsequently on a large-scale clinical genetic epidemiology study.

POLICY IMPLICATION

This approach responds to the call from the National Institute on Aging to develop strategies to improve the health status of older adults in diverse populations. Our study will offer a practical guidance to health researchers and policymakers in identifying understudied and hard-to-reach specific Asian American populations for clinical studies or initiatives. This would further contribute in reducing the health and research disparity gaps among older minority populations.

Factors affecting the recruitment of Hispanic/Latinx American older adults in clinical trials in the United States: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Participation of Hispanic/Latinx American older adults (HLAOA) in clinical trials is fundamental to health equity in aging research. However, information on strategies for the successful recruitment of this population in clinical trials is limited.

DESIGN

This scoping review aims to identify hindering and facilitating factors that impact the recruitment of HLAOA in clinical trials in the United States.

METHODS

Two databases (PubMed, EMBASE) were searched for original research articles from inception until March 2022 reporting on factors that engaged HLAoa (≥65) in clinical trials. One thousand and thirteen studies were scrutinized to identify 31 eligible articles.

RESULTS

Most articles were from cancer clinical trials (14 studies). Hindering factors that impacted the recruitment of HLAoa in clinical trials were related to (i) study design and logistics challenges, (ii) challenges imposed by social determinants of health, (iii) communication barriers, and (iv) patients' mistrust, and (v) family issues. Facilitating factors include (i) effective modes of outreach, (ii) strategic clinical trial design, (iii) incorporating culturally-respectful approaches that are tailored to the participants' sociocultural background, and (iv) bridging language barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful recruitment of HLAOA into clinical trials requires identifying the study question, co-designing the trial design, implementation, and evaluation in respectful collaboration with the Hispanic/Latinx community with careful attention to their needs and minimizing the study burden on this vulnerable population. Factors identified here may guide researchers to better understand the needs of HLAOA and successfully recruit them into clinical trials, leading to more equitable research that increases their representation in clinical research.

Knowledge, attitudes, and perception of 398 cancer patients toward participation in clinical trials: A single-center study from New Delhi, India

Background and Objective:

Clinical trials are considered to be the gold standard research methodology for evaluating the efficacy and safety of healthcare interventions.

Materials and Methods:

A cross-sectional study was conducted using standardized self-administered questionnaires prepared by the research team and statistician. The questionnaires were offered to cancer patients presented at a tertiary care center.

Results:

We surveyed 398 cancer patients, 193 (48.5%) males and 205 (51.5%) females with a mean (±standard deviation) 55.39 (±13.59) of age in years. Out of total, only 59 (14.82%) had the prior knowledge of the clinical trial. Forty-three (10.80%) participants were willing to participate in clinical trials.

Conclusion:

Cancer patients had preconceived notions and myths that linger in our society that clinical trial participation will harm them. The researchers/oncologists need to explore the rationale, objectives, and benefits of taking part in clinical trials and make it easy to understand by cancer patients.

Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Randomised trials (also referred to as 'randomised controlled trials' or 'trials') are the optimal way to minimise bias in evaluating the effects of competing treatments, therapies and innovations in health care. It is important to achieve the required sample size for a trial, otherwise trialists may not be able to draw conclusive results leading to research waste and raising ethical questions about trial participation. The reasons why potential participants may accept or decline participation are multifaceted. Yet, the evidence of effectiveness of interventions to improve recruitment to trials is not substantial and fails to recognise these individual decision-making processes. It is important to synthesise the experiences and perceptions of those invited to participate in randomised trials to better inform recruitment strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To explore potential trial participants' views and experiences of the recruitment process for participation. The specific objectives are to describe potential participants' perceptions and experiences of accepting or declining to participate in trials, to explore barriers and facilitators to trial participation, and to explore to what extent barriers and facilitators identified are addressed by strategies to improve recruitment evaluated in previous reviews of the effects of interventions including a Cochrane Methodology Review.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, LILACS, PsycINFO, ORRCA, and grey literature sources. We ran the most recent set of searches for which the results were incorporated into the review in July 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative and mixed-methods studies (with an identifiable qualitative component) that explored potential trial participants' experiences and perceptions of being invited to participate in a trial. We excluded studies that focused only on recruiters' perspectives, and trials solely involving children under 18 years, or adults who were assessed as having impaired mental capacity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Five review authors independently assessed the titles, abstracts and full texts identified by the search. We used the CART (completeness, accuracy, relevance, timeliness) criteria to exclude studies that had limited focus on the phenomenon of interest. We used QSR NVivo to extract and manage the data. We assessed methodological limitations using the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool. We used thematic synthesis to analyse and synthesise the evidence. This provided analytical themes and a conceptual model. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. Our findings were integrated with two previous intervention effectiveness reviews by juxtaposing the quantitative and qualitative findings in a matrix.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 studies (published in 30 papers) in our synthesis. Twenty-two key findings were produced under three broad themes (with six subthemes) to capture the experience of being invited to participate in a trial and making the decision whether to participate. Most of these findings had moderate to high confidence. We identified factors from the trial itself that influenced participation. These included how trial information was communicated, and elements of the trial such as the time commitment that might be considered burdensome. The second theme related to personal factors such as how other people can influence the individual's decision; and how a personal understanding of potential harms and benefits could impact on the decision. Finally, the potential benefits of participation were found to be key to the decision to participate, namely personal benefits such as access to new treatments, but also the chance to make a difference and help others. The conceptual model we developed presents the decision-making process as a gauge and the factors that influence whether the person will, or will not, take part.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative evidence synthesis has provided comprehensive insight into the complexity of factors that influence a person's decision whether to participate in a trial. We developed key questions that trialists can ask when developing their recruitment strategy. In addition, our conceptual model emphasises the need for participant-centred approaches to recruitment. We demonstrated moderate to high level confidence in our findings, which in some way can be attributed to the large volume of highly relevant studies in this field. We recommend that these insights be used to direct or influence or underpin future recruitment strategies that are developed in a participant-driven way that ultimately improves trial conduct and reduces research waste.

Knowledge and Beliefs About Biospecimen Research Among Chinese Older Women in Chicago's Chinatown

BACKGROUND

Enhancing the participation of Chinese older women in biobanking efforts is important for precision medicine efforts, as underrepresented groups risk benefiting less than others from medical advancements in individualized therapies. Focusing on a sample of Chinese older women in Chicago's Chinatown, this qualitative study seeks to describe attitudes toward, and barriers and facilitators of, participation in biospecimen research.

METHOD

We conducted six focus groups among Chinese-speaking adult women age 45 and above. Focus groups were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for emergent themes.

RESULTS

Forty-seven women participated in focus groups, the majority (66.0%) were age 66 and over and half (50.1%) had less than a high school education. Participants expressed predominantly positive attitudes toward biospecimen research, but also identified multifaceted barriers to participation that included cultural beliefs of the body, perceived physical and privacy risks, as well as perceptions related to aging. Use of minimally invasive biospecimen collection and education to promote awareness of biospecimen research were suggested facilitators to increasing biospecimen research participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Culturally and linguistically isolated populations like Chinese older women are at risk of exclusion from advancements in precision medicine. Our findings provide cultural insights for tailoring interventions for Chinese older women to increase knowledge, change attitudes, and increase intention and participation in biospecimen research. We also highlight the need for individual, family, and community level interventions to promote healthy aging among Chinese older women.

Design of a cluster-randomized minority recruitment trial: RECRUIT

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic minority groups remain underrepresented in clinical trials. Many strategies to increase minority recruitment focus on minority communities and emphasize common diseases such as hypertension. Scant literature focuses on minority recruitment to trials of less common conditions, often conducted in specialty clinics and dependent on physician referrals. We identified trust/mistrust of specialist physician investigators and institutions conducting medical research and consequent participant reluctance to participate in clinical trials as key-shared barriers across racial/ethnic groups. We developed a trust-based continuous quality improvement intervention to build trust between specialist physician investigators and community minority-serving physicians and ultimately potential trial participants. To avoid the inherent biases of non-randomized studies, we evaluated the intervention in the national Randomized Recruitment Intervention Trial (RECRUIT). This report presents the design of RECRUIT. Specialty clinic follow-up continues through April 2017.

METHODS

We hypothesized that specialist physician investigators and coordinators trained in the trust-based continuous quality improvement intervention would enroll a greater proportion of minority participants in their specialty clinics than specialist physician investigators in control specialty clinics. Specialty clinic was the unit of randomization. Using continuous quality improvement, the specialist physician investigators and coordinators tailored recruitment approaches to their specialty clinic characteristics and populations. Primary analyses were adjusted for clustering by specialty clinic within parent trial and matching covariates.

RESULTS

RECRUIT was implemented in four multi-site clinical trials (parent trials) supported by three National Institutes of Health institutes and included 50 associated specialty clinics from these parent trials. Using current data, we have 88% power or greater to detect a 0.15 or greater difference from the currently observed control proportion adjusting for clustering. We detected no differences in baseline matching criteria between intervention and control specialty clinics (all p values > 0.17).

CONCLUSION

RECRUIT was the first multi-site randomized control trial to examine the effectiveness of a trust-based continuous quality improvement intervention to increase minority recruitment into clinical trials. RECRUIT's innovations included its focus on building trust between specialist investigators and minority-serving physicians, the use of continuous quality improvement to tailor the intervention to each specialty clinic's specific racial/ethnic populations and barriers to minority recruitment, and the use of specialty clinics from more than one parent multi-site trial to increase generalizability. The effectiveness of the RECRUIT intervention will be determined after the completion of trial data collection and planned analyses.