ArticleLupus science & medicine2020
Lupus patient decisions about clinical trial participation: a qualitative evaluation of perceptions, facilitators and barriers.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Patient perspectives on clinical trial participation for novel advanced therapies: a focus group study in systemic lupus erythematosus.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Factors Influencing Clinical Trial Participation: An In-depth Analysis of Patients With Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis.ACR open rheumatology · 2025Review
- Childcare as a social determinant of access to healthcare: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Lupus clinical trials and the promise of future therapies.Rheumatology and immunology research · 2023Article
- Disparities in Lupus and the Role of Social Determinants of Health: Current State of Knowledge and Directions for Future Research.ACR open rheumatology · 2023Review
- Protocol for virtual physical examination in an observational, longitudinal study evaluating virtual outcome measures in SLE.Lupus science & medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Barriers and strategies for recruiting participants who identify as racial minorities in musculoskeletal health research: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Patient-centred clinical trial design.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2022Review
- Behavioural approaches to recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a systematic mapping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Using Critical Race Theory to Understand Trial Participation Among Black Individuals With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Qualitative Study of Patients and Caregivers.Arthritis care & research · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Although SLE disproportionately affects minority racial groups, they are significantly under-represented in clinical trials in the USA. This may lead to misleading conclusions in race-based subgroup analyses. We conducted focus groups to evaluate the perceptions of diverse patients with lupus about clinical trial participation. Methods: A qualitative research design employed three 90 min focus groups led by a trained moderator and guided by the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Open-ended questions about trial participation included advantages and disadvantages (behavioural beliefs), approving and disapproving significant others (normative beliefs), and participation enhancers and barriers (control beliefs). Discussions were recorded, transcribed and analysed to identify emerging themes. Results: Patients with SLE (n=23) aged 21-72, with increased proportion of minority groups (65%), participated. Reported advantages of trial participation included altruism and personal benefit. Disadvantages included uncertainties, disappointment, information burden, and life-health balance. Although some patients had discussed research participation with approving or disapproving family or friends, self-approval superseded external approval. Barriers included logistics and time, and facilitators included flexibility in scheduling, advance notice of studies, streamlined forms, and hope for SLE improvement. Conclusions: Knowledge about potential benefits of clinical trial participation was high. Minority patients demonstrated confidence in making their own informed decisions, but major barriers for all participants included burdensome forms, travel, childcare, and work. These suggest a major impact on minority and all recruitment from behavioural and control aspects, which should be considered in the logistics of trial design. This does not minimise the potential importance of improved access and education about clinical research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.