Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39237734›Full record

ArticleCommunications medicine2024

The influence of socioeconomic status on individual attitudes and experience with clinical trials.

Jennifer Y Kim, Maria Florez, Emily Botto, Xoli Belgrave, Clare Grace, Ken Getz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Randomized Comparison of Online Motivational Themes in Clinical Trial Recruitment.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. The ethical permissibility of financial incentives.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026
    Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Jennifer Y KimTufts School of Medicine, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Boston, MA, USA. Jennifer_y.kim@tufts.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3270-9105
Maria FlorezTufts School of Medicine, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Boston, MA, USA.
Emily BottoTufts School of Medicine, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8013-2959
Xoli BelgraveParexel, Durham, NC, USA.
Clare GraceParexel, Durham, NC, USA.
Ken GetzTufts School of Medicine, Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCharacterizing perceptions of clinical trials among the socioeconomically disadvantaged is necessary for understanding how social determinants of health such as socioeconomic disparities in education and income can affect people's awareness of and exposure to clinical trials

methodsA survey was distributed in spring 2023 among a survey taking sample stratified by demographic variables to reflect the U.S. POPULATION: The survey assessed the socioeconomic status of the respondent and related covariates, as well as outcome measures including interest in joining a clinical trial, concerns relating to participation, and whether the respondent had previously been asked to participate. Multiple and logistic regression were used to assess the relationship between predictor and outcome variables

resultsHere we show the results of outcome measures regressed on main predictors related to socioeconomic status and related demographic predictors. Education, employment status, insurance coverage, and English proficiency were significant predictors of interest in clinical trial participation. Education and the presence of a healthcare professional or former clinical trial participant in the respondent's personal network were significant predictors of whether the respondent had previously been asked to participate in a clinical trial

conclusionsThe results of the analysis reveal how socioeconomically vulnerable groups, including those from low income and low education groups, are being excluded in clinical research. Analyses also uncovered the impact of clinical trial social influence-the presence of having a family or friend in one's social network who participated in a clinical trial-on willingness to participate and exposure to clinical trials.

Identifiers

PMID39237734
PMCPMC11377822

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.