ArticleAmerican heart journal2024
Investigating racial and gender disparities in virtual randomized clinical trial enrollment: Insights from the BE ACTIVE study.
Article in American heart journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of opt-in versus opt-out framing on trial recruitment: a study within a trial of the GAMEPAD randomized trial.American heart journal · 2026Trial
- Effect of Gamification Plus Automated Coaching to Increase Physical Activity Among Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease: The GAMEPAD Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Trial
- Messaging Informed by Behavioral Economics and Representativeness in Clinical Research Enrollment: Four Randomized Clinical Trials.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Behaviorally Designed Gamification and Physical Activity Among Breast and Prostate Cancer Survivors.JACC. CardioOncology · 2025Article
- Measuring Representativeness in Clinical Trials.Circulation · 2025Review
- Recruitment of Adolescents to Virtual Clinical Trials: Recruitment Results From the Health4Me Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) often suffer from a lack of representation from historically marginalized populations, and it is uncertain whether virtual RCTs (vRCTs) enhance representativeness or if elements of their consent and enrollment processes may instead contribute to underrepresentation of these groups. In this study, we aimed to identify disparities in enrollment demographics in a vRCT, the BE ACTIVE study, which recruited patients within a single health system. We discovered that the proportions of eligible patients who were randomized differed significantly by gender and race/ethnicity (men 1.2%, women 2.0%, P < .001; White 1.8%, Black 1.3%, Hispanic 0.7%, Asian 0.9%; P < .001), and compared with White patients, non-White patients were less likely to have a valid email address on file and were less likely to click on the email link to the study webpage and begin enrollment.
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.