Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38822242›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024

Modifications of the readiness assessment for pragmatic trials tool for appropriate use with Indigenous populations.

Joanna Hikaka, Ellen M McCreedy, Eric Jutkowitz, Ellen P McCarthy, Rosa R Baier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Discontinuing the Term "Stakeholder" From the NIA IMPACT Collaboratory Engaging Partners Team: An Example of the Process of Language Change in an Organization.The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  4. 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.

Joanna HikakaDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. j.hikaka@auckland.ac.nz.
Ellen M McCreedyCenter for Long-Term Care Quality & Innovation, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA.
Eric JutkowitzDepartment of Health Services, Policy & Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA.
Ellen P McCarthyHinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA.
Rosa R BaierCenter for Long-Term Care Quality & Innovation, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA.

Funding

Training Core (I)U54AG063546 · NIA · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI JOSEPH E. GAUGLER · 2019 to 2026
$125.9M
Health Research Council of New Zealand 21/1062NIA NIH HHS U54 AG063546NIA NIH HHS U54AG063546
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInequities in health access and outcomes exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations. Embedded pragmatic randomized, controlled trials (ePCTs) can test the real-world effectiveness of health care interventions. Assessing readiness for ePCT, with tools such as the Readiness Assessment for Pragmatic Trials (RAPT) model, is an important component. Although equity must be explicitly incorporated in the design, testing, and widespread implementation of any health care intervention to achieve equity, RAPT does not explicitly consider equity. This study aimed to identify adaptions necessary for the application of the 'Readiness Assessment for Pragmatic Trials' (RAPT) tool in embedded pragmatic randomized, controlled trials (ePCTs) with Indigenous communities.

methodsWe surveyed and interviewed participants (researchers with experience in research involving Indigenous communities) over three phases (July-December 2022) in this mixed-methods study to explore the appropriateness and recommended adaptions of current RAPT domains and to identify new domains that would be appropriate to include. We thematically analyzed responses and used an iterative process to modify RAPT.

resultsThe 21 participants identified that RAPT needed to be modified to strengthen readiness assessment in Indigenous research. In addition, five new domains were proposed to support Indigenous communities' power within the research processes: Indigenous Data Sovereignty; Acceptability - Indigenous Communities; Risk of Research; Research Team Experience; Established Partnership). We propose a modified tool, RAPT-Indigenous (RAPT-I) for use in research with Indigenous communities to increase the robustness and cultural appropriateness of readiness assessment for ePCT. In addition to producing a tool for use, it outlines a methodological approach to adopting research tools for use in and with Indigenous communities by drawing on the experience of researchers who are part of, and/or working with, Indigenous communities to undertake interventional research, as well as those with expertise in health equity, implementation science, and public health.

conclusionRAPT-I has the potential to provide a useful framework for readiness assessment prior to ePCT in Indigenous communities. RAPT-I also has potential use by bodies charged with critically reviewing proposed pragmatic research including funding and ethics review boards.

Indexed as

Indigenous PeoplesPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services, IndigenousHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesData sovereigntyEquityHealth services researchImplementation scienceIndigenous health

Identifiers

PMID38822242
PMCPMC11140978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.