ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Racial and Ethnic Reporting and Representation in Phase III Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials in the US.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minoritized populations in the United States, yet these groups remain markedly underrepresented in clinical research. Phase III clinical trials are critical for informing regulatory decision and treatment guidelines, but the extent to which they report and include racial and ethnic diverse participants in the US context has not been systematically assessed. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive retrospective review of all US-based Phase III AD clinical trials from 1997 to 2023 using the Trialtrove database, cross-referenced with PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and other public sources. We analyzed long-term trends in the reporting and representation of racial and ethnic groups across the longest observation period to date. Results: Of 88 identified trials, 71 (80.7%) had published data. Nearly half (49.3%) did not report any race or ethnicity information. Among those that did, most focused on White patients, with limited and inconsistent reporting for racial and ethnic minoritized groups. Median enrollment was 0.9% for Asian or Pacific Islander, 4.5% for Black (ethnicity unspecified), 7.2% for Black (non-Hispanic), 5.2% for Hispanic, and 0.4% for Native American participants, compared to nearly 90% for White participants. Only 4.2% of trials conducted subgroup analysis by race or ethnicity, and none reported detailed outcome differences. Terminology varied widely and no trials acknowledged underrepresentation or proposed corrective strategies. Notably, these patterns showed little to no improvement over time. Conclusions and Implications: Racial and ethnic minoritized populations remain consistently underreported and underrepresented in Phase III AD trials in the US, limiting the generalizability of findings and risking the exacerbation of health inequities. Improving equity in AD research will require standardized reporting, inclusive recruitment practices, and intentional efforts to engage underrepresented communities.
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.