ArticleJournal of community health2024
Community Trust, Attitudes and Preferences Related to Participation in Cancer Research in South Carolina.
Article in Journal of community health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Digital Asthma Self-Management Program for Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Understanding and evaluating the impact of a multi-institutional academic partnership to reduce cancer health disparities.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Ranking of Health Problems and Prioritization of Cancer Education Topics by African American Communities in South Carolina.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025Article
- Selection biases in the systematic collection of breast biobank specimens.NPJ breast cancer · 2025Article
- Access to and interest in human milk research opportunities among Black pregnant and postpartum people.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Article
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 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
African American adults have the highest mortality rate for most cancers in the United States, and meaningful, community-driven research is needed to inform optimal strategies for addressing these disparities. Unfortunately, research mistrust, often driven by historical inequities, is well-documented among African Americans.This study explored trust, attitudes, and preferences regarding participation in cancer research activities among primarily African American and other medically underserved communities in South Carolina from August 2020 to December 2021. Trust was measured using the Trust in Medical Researchers Scale (TMRS).The mean TMRS score for all study participants (N = 179) was 26.54 (SD 7.57) out of 48 (maximum possible score). Significant differences in mean values of the TMRS scores were only observed for gender (p = 0.0056) and race (p < 0.0001), with White participants and males reporting higher levels of trust in medical researchers. Overall, 52.5% of participants were somewhat likely or likely to volunteer to participate in a cancer research opportunity, with White participants (73.81%) being more likely to participate in cancer research compared to African American participants (45.74%) (p = 0.0054). Furthermore, participants were most willing to provide saliva (80.85%) and urine samples (80.85%), new blood samples (60.64%), stool samples (54.26%), medical records or laboratory results (52.13%) and least willing to allow left-over blood, tissue, or other fluids from medical procedures to be used for research (50%).These results provide evidence of the need for concerted programmatic efforts to build trust in cancer researchers, particularly among females and African American adults.
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.