ArticleArthritis care & research2025
"It's Just Good Science": A Qualitative Study Exploring Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Canadian Arthritis Research.
Article in Arthritis care & research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "What do you want this information for?": cognitive interviews with arthritis researchers to inform the development of a health equity-focused demographic survey for outcomes research.BMC rheumatology · 2026Article
- Call to action: building a better future together, powered by evidence, guided by collective impact.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDespite knowledge that health outcomes vary according to patient characteristics, identity, and geography, including underrepresented populations in arthritis research remains a challenge. We conducted interviews to explore how researchers in arthritis have used equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) principles to inform their research.
methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with individuals who 1) have experience conducting arthritis research studies, 2) reside in and/or conduct their research in Canada, and 3) speak English or French. Participants were recruited using purposive and respondent-driven sampling. Interviews were conducted over video call and audio recordings were transcribed. Template analysis was applied to interview transcripts to explore participant experiences and perceptions of EDI in arthritis research.
resultsParticipants (n = 22) identified that a lack of representation in arthritis research translates to the inability to provide comprehensive care. Participants emphasized considering EDI early in all arthritis research to effectively affect a study. Themes were categorized as benefits, barriers, and facilitators. The perceived benefits were the ability to generate knowledge and reduce health disparities. Barriers included mistrust from historically exploited populations, unintended consequences, lack of access to research opportunities, and logistical challenges. Facilitators included building community partnerships, curating diverse research teams, incentivizing researchers and funder support, and fostering humility in research environments.
conclusionImproving representation in research is needed to improve health outcomes for diverse groups of people living with arthritis. Identified barriers to EDI in research must be addressed and partnerships and supports must be facilitated to achieve more representation in arthritis research within Canada.
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.