Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40176184›Full record

ArticleTrials2025

Advocating for collaboration among key partners to promote diversity in clinical studies amid policy challenges in the United States of America.

Samuel Byiringiro, Juliana K Garcia, Nsenga Farrell, Bunmi Ogungbe, Rifath Ara Alam Barsha, Hailey N Miller, Evans Whitaker, Paul Wang, William E Rosa, Barbara E Bierer and 9 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

19 authors.

Samuel ByiringiroSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. sbyirin1@jhu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9165-0348
Juliana K GarciaElson S Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, Spokane, USA.
Nsenga FarrellUniversity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
Bunmi OgungbeSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Rifath Ara Alam BarshaSchool of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Hailey N MillerSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Evans WhitakerLane Medical Library, Stanford University, Palo Alto, USA.
Paul WangSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
William E RosaDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
Barbara E BiererMulti-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women'S Hospital and Harvard, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6448-8170
Cheryl R HimmelfarbSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Erin D MichosSchool of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA.
Koen De LombaertStudypages, San Francisco, USA.
Maya BerdicheskySchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Stephan BusqueSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Latha PalaniappanSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Eldrin LewisSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Fatima RodriguezSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
Hannah ValantineSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.

Funding

American Heart Association 23DIVSUP1058025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The lack of diversity in clinical studies has significant ethical and health consequences, limiting the development of effective treatments for diverse populations. Homogeneous participation in clinical studies contributes to health disparities, particularly among historically underrepresented groups in the United States (US). Racial, ethnic, and other minoritized populations have long been excluded from clinical research. In response, the US Congress mandated the National Institutes of Health to assess the impacts of insufficient diversity in clinical studies. Despite efforts by the government, non-profit organizations, and industry players to improve diversity in clinical studies, progress has been slow due to fragmented approaches. For instance, the new US administration (2025) has recently released executive orders which threaten to reverse the progress made in inclusive clinical research. The Stanford Think Tank on Diversity and Equity in Clinical Trials, held in September 2023, brought together key partners across multiple sectors and professions to discuss barriers and explore potential solutions to participation in clinical studies. In this commentary, we discuss the importance of collaborative, inclusive strategies in clinical study design to advance equitable health outcomes for all. Further, we discuss potential implications of the government's dismissal of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives on diverse research participation.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicCultural DiversityHealth PolicyPatient SelectionCooperative BehaviorHumansUnited StatesClinical researchClinical studiesClinical trialsDiversity in clinical researchRegulatory institutions

Identifiers

PMID40176184
PMCPMC11963400

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.