ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2025
A mixed-methods study on the recruitment of patients from ethnic minority groups to clinical trials in a central London teaching hospital.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aims: Additional research is needed to fully understand barriers in recruitment to clinical trials and how these might affect different ethnic groups. The aim of this study was to explore the factors acting as barriers and facilitators in the process of recruiting patients to clinical trials in a UK (central London) teaching hospital, with a particular focus on patients from ethnic minority groups, and on areas where action could be taken. Methods: The study was designed as a mixed-methods study comprised of: 1) a quantitative workstream which explored variations in the ethnic and gender breakdown of people admitted to hospital relative to the demographic characteristics of patients enrolled into research studies at the hospital, and 2) a qualitative workstream which explored staff experiences of recruiting patients to clinical trials and patients' experiences of being approached to take part in a clinical trial. The quantitative workstream provided the necessary context for the design of the qualitative workstream. Results: We found that the chances of being involved in research at the hospital were lower in all ethnic minority groups and lower amongst female patients. Some of the factors acting as barriers in trial participation included patients' perceptions of clinical research as a form of experimental medicine that might have high risks, the role of family members in decision-making processes, and language barriers (where patients might not be fluent in English and the study information is not communicated in other languages). Potential strategies to address underrepresentation included the development of accessible information about research and how patient data are used, development of study materials in multiple languages and use of interpreters during the recruitment process, support for staff in involving family members in decision-making and a greater ethnic diversity within study teams. Conclusions: The under-representation of people from minority ethnic populations in clinical research remains a major challenge, impacting on the rigour and applicability of findings as well as implying some populations are missing out on the benefits of research. Study design needs to place greater emphasis on patient need and convenience and therefore to take greater account of the deterrent effect of financial and time burdens on trial participants. Recruiting sites and sponsors need to review the provision of interpreting and translation support for trials, including availability and cost to individual studies and staff confidence in reliability.
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.