Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31955173›Full record

ArticlePublic health genomics2019

"I'm a Little More Trusting": Components of Trustworthiness in the Decision to Participate in Genomics Research for African Americans.

Susan Racine Passmore, Amelia M Jamison, Gregory R Hancock, Moaz Abdelwadoud, C Daniel Mullins, Taylor B Rogers, Stephen B Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health genomics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Understanding Inclusion and Participation of People From Black African Diaspora Communities in Health and Care Research: A Realist Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Promoting Inclusive Recruitment: a Qualitative Study of Black Adults' Decision to Participate in Genetic Research.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Structural Racism in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Moving Forward.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Susan Racine PassmoreCollaborative Center for Health Equity, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, passmore2@wisc.edu.
Amelia M JamisonCenter for Health Equity, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Gregory R HancockDepartment of Human Development and Quantitative Methodology, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Moaz AbdelwadoudDepartment of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
C Daniel MullinsDepartment of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Taylor B RogersDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Stephen B ThomasDepartment of Health Policy and Management, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.

Funding

University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001883 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ALEX BUI, Nina Thawata Harawa · 2016 to 2026
$8.6M
Feasibility of an Innovative Method to Understand the Dynamics of Choice and Create Diversity in Genomics Research among Older African AmericansR21HG011503 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI PASSMORE, SUSAN RACINE · 2020 to 2021
$363k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001883NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373NHGRI NIH HHS R21 HG011503
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis study sought to explore the decision to participate in genomics research for African American individuals. Our overall goal was to explore (1) the attributes that significantly contribute to willingness to participate in genomics research; (2) how these attributes are interpreted (what is their meaning?); (3) how trustworthiness is estimated in the decision to participate in research (i.e., what are the symbolic representations or heuristics of trustworthiness in decision-making?); and (4) how participants see factors to counterweigh each other.

methodsWe sought a methodology that would afford exploration of the compensatory nature of decision-making where some choice attributes may be weighed differently than others as well as the use of heuristics (shortcuts to estimate key concepts in the mentally taxing task of decision-making) for concepts such as trustworthiness. We used a qualitative story deck to create hypothetical research scenarios with variable attributes (i.e., researcher race/ethnicity; institutional affiliation; research goal; and biospecimen requested) to determine how individuals find and interpret information to make decisions about research participation. These semi-structured interviews (n = 82) were conducted in African American barbershops in Baltimore City and Prince George's County, Maryland.

resultsQuantitative and qualitative analysis was completed. Findings include that, even in the absence of interpersonal connection, trustworthiness can be communicated through multiple factors, such as (1) shared values with researchers and (2) familiarity. Conversely, (1) ambiguity, especially regarding the use of biospecimens, (2) negative reputations, and (3) perceptions of "hidden agendas" were associated with a lower willingness to participate. However, the alignment of participant and research goals was weighed more heavily in decisions than other factors.

conclusionThis study finds that negatively assessed characteristics in research design do not result in automatic rejections of participation. Negative assessments can be mitigated by emphasizing the multiple factors that communicate trustworthiness in the consent process, which may improve rates of research participation.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchGenomicsTrustAdultBlack or African AmericanDecision MakingEthnicityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationPatient ParticipationYoung AdultAfrican AmericanBiospecimensGenomicsResearch participation

Identifiers

PMID31955173
PMCPMC7037806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.