Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35154814›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2022

"There's not much we can do…" researcher-level barriers to the inclusion of underrepresented participants in translational research.

Susan Racine Passmore, Abby Kisicki, Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi, Gina Green-Harris, Dorothy Farrar Edwards

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Reducing translational science roadblocks to disability research.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Susan Racine PassmoreCollaborative Center for Health Equity, Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1080-2392
Abby KisickiCollaborative Center for Health Equity, Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Andrea Gilmore-BykovskyiSchool of Nursing, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Gina Green-HarrisCenter for Community Engagement and Health Partnerships, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Dorothy Farrar EdwardsCollaborative Center for Health Equity, Institute for Clinical and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.

Funding

The Neighborhoods Study: Contextual Disadvantage and Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD)R01AG070883 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI AMY J. KIND · 2021 to 2026
$42.1M
White matter degeneration: biomarkers in preclinical Alzheimer's DiseaseR01AG037639 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BENDLIN, BARBARA BRIGITTA · 2012 to 2023
$5.3M
Novel Approaches to Identifying and Engaging Disadvantaged Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) in Clinical ResearchK76AG060005 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI GILMORE-BYKOVSKYI, ANDREA L · 2018 to 2022
$1.1M
NIA NIH HHS K76 AG060005NIA NIH HHS R01 AG037639NIA NIH HHS R01 AG070883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe lack of diversity in health research participation has serious consequences for science as well as ethics. While there is growing interest in solving the problem, much of the work to date focuses on attitudes of distrust among members of underrepresented communities. However, there is also a pressing need to understand existing barriers within the cultural and structural context of researchers and research staff.

methodsThis study adopted a sequential exploratory mixed-methods design to allow for a focused examination of barriers to inclusive research recruitment among researchers and staff. Barriers first identified from an initial quantitative investigation (web-based survey; n = 279) were further explored through qualitative methods (key informant interviews; n = 26). Participants were investigators and research team members in both phases of the study.

resultsThe survey revealed a paradoxical disconnect between participants' reported belief in the

conclusionsIt is crucial that principal investigators not only understand the consequences of the continued exclusion of marginalized groups from research but also implement strategies to reverse this trend and communicate with research staff on the issue. While individual bias does play a role (ex: a priori assumptions about the willingness or ability of members of underrepresented groups to participate), these behaviors are part of a larger context of systemic racism.

Indexed as

Health equityrecruitment/retentionresearch inclusion

Identifiers

PMID35154814
PMCPMC8807123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.