ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Clinical Studies Reported to ClinicalTrials.gov, 2009-2024.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: A lack of transparent reporting of race and ethnicity in clinical research limits the ability to identify health inequities and evaluate to what extent clinical research includes diverse populations. Objective: To identify study characteristics associated with reporting race and ethnicity of clinical study participants and to document temporal trends in race and ethnicity reporting on clinicaltrials.gov. Design: Cross-sectional analysis of interventional trials and observational studies from 2009-2024; multivariable logistic regression assessed study-level factors associated with reporting race and ethnicity. Setting: Global registry of clinical studies (clinicaltrials.gov). Participants: 58,163 studies with posted results and without early termination. Exposures: Study characteristics: sponsor trial phase, study type, and country. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reporting of race, reporting of ethnicity, reporting of both. Results: Among 58,163 studies (mean enrollment=1,215 participants), 44.8% did not report race or ethnicity to the repository (mean enrollment=1,481 participants). The proportion of studies reporting both race and ethnicity rose from 7.4% in 2013 to 54.6% in 2024. In multivariable models, observational studies had lower odds of reporting race and ethnicity (odds ratio[OR]=0.55, 95% confidence interval[CI]=0.49-0.61) compared with interventional trials. Phase 4 trials were least likely phase to report race and ethnicity (OR=0.32; CI=0.29-0.35), and studies with only National Institute of Health funding were more likely to report race and ethnicity compared to studies with any industry funding or sponsorship (OR=1.70, CI=1.61-1.79). For studies that reported race, White participants comprised ≥50% each year based on study-level percentages; proportions of Asian participants declined, and Black participants fluctuated. 'Not Hispanic or Latino' remained ≥80% of reported ethnicity annually. Conclusions and Relevance: Race and ethnicity reporting on clinicaltrials.gov has improved markedly yet remains incomplete, with shortfalls in late-phase and observational studies.
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.