Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33974821›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2021

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

Soumya J Niranjan, Jennifer A Wenzel, Michelle Y Martin, Mona N Fouad, Selwyn M Vickers, Badrinath R Konety, Raegan W Durant

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Faith, Culture, and Cancer: A Qualitative Study Exploring Muslim Women's Perspectives on Clinical Trials in the United Kingdom.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  7. Evaluating the Health Literacy Characteristics of Question Prompt Lists on National Cancer Institute Designated Cancer Center Websites.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Bridging the Gap: Culturally Responsive Strategies for NIH Trial Recruitment.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Soumya J NiranjanUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.ORCID 0000-0002-9477-9187
Jennifer A WenzelJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Michelle Y MartinUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN.
Mona N FouadUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
Selwyn M VickersUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.ORCID 0000-0003-3133-5543
Badrinath R KonetyUniversity of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN.
Raegan W DurantUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
University of Alabama at Birmingham · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Minnesota Medical Center · USUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn 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

methodsWe 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.

resultsFour 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.

conclusionOur 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.

Indexed as

Minority GroupsNeoplasmsEthnicityHumansPatient SelectionPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID33974821
PMCPMC8257918
OpenAlexW3163421818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.