Observational studyPloS one2022
Beyond inclusion: Enacting team equity in precision medicine research.
Observational study in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breaking research silos to achieve equitable precision medicine in rheumatology.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2025Review
- A qualitative study of diversity in precision medicine research: The development and stakeholder assessment of a Diversity Decision Map.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Research for all: building a diverse researcher community for the All of Us Research Program.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Improving Care for Marginalized Populations at Risk for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: Innovations that Expanded Reach in the CHARM Study.Public health genomics · 2024Article
- The ethical challenges of diversifying genomic data: A qualitative evidence synthesis.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2024Review
- Community Engagement Strategies for Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Populations.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2024Review
- Extending an Antiracism Lens to the Implementation of Precision Public Health Interventions.American journal of public health · 2023Article
- National Couples' Health and Time Study: Sample, Design, and Weighting.Population research and policy review · 2023Article
- Community Engagement in Precision Medicine Research: Organizational Practices and Their Impacts for Equity.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo identify meanings of and challenges to enacting equitable diversification of genomics research, and specifically precision medicine research (PMR), teams.
methodsWe conducted in-depth interviews with 102 individuals involved in three U.S.-based precision medicine research consortia and conducted over 400 observation hours of their working group meetings, consortium-wide meetings, and conference presentations. We also reviewed published reports on genomic workforce diversity (WFD), particularly those relevant to the PMR community.
resultsOur study finds that many PMR teams encounter challenges as they strive to achieve equitable diversification on scientific teams. Interviewees articulated that underrepresented team members were often hired to increase the study's capacity to recruit diverse research participants, but are limited to on-the-ground staff positions with little influence over study design. We find existing hierarchies and power structures in the academic research ecosystem compound challenges for equitable diversification.
conclusionOur results suggest that meaningful diversification of PMR teams will only be possible when team equity is prioritized as a core value in academic research communities.
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.