Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39899634›Full record

ReviewCirculation2025

Measuring Representativeness in Clinical Trials.

Allen Sanyi, Samuel Byiringiro, Sanaz Dabiri, Mireille Jacobson, Amanda Boyd, Modele O Ogunniyi, Alanna A Morris, Rachel Kohn, Neal W Dickert, Meghan B Lane-Fall and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Circulation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Achieving Representation in Cardiovascular Device Clinical Research: The Role of Regulatory Science.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Letter to the editor concerning "assessing the association between degenerative disc disease and spinal mobility" by Schönnagel L, et al. (Eur spine J [2025]: doi: 10.1007/s00586-025-08919-5).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    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

13 authors.

Allen SanyiDepartment of Medicine (A.S.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.ORCID 0009-0005-7200-2317
Samuel ByiringiroJohns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD (S.B.).
Sanaz DabiriLeonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics (S.D., M.J.), University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Mireille JacobsonLeonard D. Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics (S.D., M.J.), University of Southern California, Los Angeles.ORCID 0000-0002-4977-8783
Amanda BoydElson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, Spokane (A.B.).ORCID 0000-0002-6055-2128
Modele O OgunniyiDivision of Cardiology (M.O.O., A.A.M., N.W.D.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.ORCID 0000-0001-9545-3675
Alanna A MorrisDivision of Cardiology (M.O.O., A.A.M., N.W.D.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.ORCID 0000-0002-8033-3707
Rachel KohnBehavioral Economics to Transform Trial Enrollment Representativeness (BETTER) Center (A.S., M.O.O., A.A.M., R.K., N.W.D., M.B.L.-F., S.D.H., A.C.F.), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.ORCID 0000-0002-9373-5035
Neal W DickertDivision of Cardiology (M.O.O., A.A.M., N.W.D.), Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.ORCID 0000-0003-4415-3861
Meghan B Lane-FallBehavioral Economics to Transform Trial Enrollment Representativeness (BETTER) Center (A.S., M.O.O., A.A.M., R.K., N.W.D., M.B.L.-F., S.D.H., A.C.F.), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.ORCID 0000-0001-7050-0017
Eldrin F LewisDepartment of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, CA (E.F.L.).
Scott D HalpernBehavioral Economics to Transform Trial Enrollment Representativeness (BETTER) Center (A.S., M.O.O., A.A.M., R.K., N.W.D., M.B.L.-F., S.D.H., A.C.F.), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Alexander C FanaroffBehavioral Economics to Transform Trial Enrollment Representativeness (BETTER) Center (A.S., M.O.O., A.A.M., R.K., N.W.D., M.B.L.-F., S.D.H., A.C.F.), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.ORCID 0000-0002-9060-5307

Funding

University of Washington Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG066509 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Lynn Bekris · 2020 to 2026
$29.0M
The influence of ward capacity strain on outcomes among survivors of acute respiratory failureK23HL146894 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI KOHN, RACHEL · 2019 to 2023
$1.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL146894NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066509
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Representativeness in randomized clinical trials remains a critical concern, affecting the external validity of trial results, equitable access to the risks and benefits of research participation, and public trust in clinical research. Although representative participation by members of groups traditionally underrepresented in clinical trials is just a surrogate for true diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in clinical trials, it can be quantified, allowing stakeholders to add empirical rigor to diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging efforts. Multiple ways to measure representativeness have been proposed, including the participation-to-prevalence ratio, raw participation proportions or numbers for relevant subgroups, and enrollment fraction for relevant subgroups. These methods have strengths and weaknesses and may be appropriate to report in certain circumstances, depending on why stakeholders seek to assess representativeness. Stakeholders-including regulatory agencies, journal editors, clinical trial investigators, and trial sponsors-may use quantitative measures of representativeness to establish trial enrollment standards, monitor equitable participation in ongoing trials, and condition funding or drug or device approval on achieving specific representativeness targets. However, using quantitative measures of representativeness in this way could have unintended consequences, including researchers "gaming" recruitment strategies to meet target numbers, overlooking nuanced variations within communities, and potentially incentivizing problematic and exploitative recruitment strategies. Although no single method of measuring representativeness offers a comprehensive solution for increasing diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in all randomized clinical trials, a carefully designed, multifaceted approach to measuring representativeness may provide stakeholders with useful perspectives for measuring progress in increasing the diversity of clinical trial participation. For stakeholders seeking a single number to assess the representativeness of a trial enrolling patients with a disease state with well-delineated demographics, the participation-to-prevalence ratio is ideal; however, for a more nuanced view of representativeness, the combination of enrollment fraction in subgroups of relevance plus a full report of the demographics of patients approached for enrollment may be more appropriate.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPatient SelectionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHumansclinical trialsdiversity, equity, inclusion, and belongingpatient recruitmentracial and ethnic minorities

Identifiers

PMID39899634
PMCPMC11801332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.