ArticleEULAR rheumatology open2025
Racial and ethnic representation in systemic sclerosis clinical trials: a 25-year analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (1999-2025).
Article in EULAR rheumatology open, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to quantify reporting of race and ethnicity in systemic sclerosis (SSc) clinical trials, characterise geographic distribution, and assess participant representation relative to US population benchmarks. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of registered SSc trials with enrolment data. Of 699 trials screened, 95 met initial criteria; after excluding 21 terminated and 4 non-SSc studies, 70 completed trials (n = 4956 participants) were analysed. We summarised the prevalence of race/ethnicity reporting and calculated race/ethnicity distributions among participants with available data. US Census estimates were used for contextual comparison. Trials were also grouped by recruiting continent. Results: Among 70 trials, 39 (55.7%) reported race and 26 (37.1%) reported ethnicity; 25 reported both, while 30 (42.9%) reported neither. Participant-level data were available for 3161 individuals for race (60.0% of all enrollees) and 2255 for ethnicity (47.1%). Among those with race reported, 78.5% were White (n = 2482), 12.7% Asian (n = 400), 4.9% Black or African American (n = 155), 1.4% multiracial (n = 45), 0.6% American Indian/Alaska Native (n = 18), and 0.3% Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (n = 8); 1.7% were unknown/unreported (n = 53). Of participants with ethnicity data (n = 2335), 10.9% were Hispanic/Latino, 86.6% not Hispanic/Latino, and 2.5% unknown/unreported. Trial activity was concentrated in North America (39.2%) and Europe (36.3%), with additional activity in Asia (16.6%); South America, Oceania, and Africa contributed smaller shares. Conclusions: Race/ethnicity reporting in SSc trials is incomplete, and available data reveal disproportionate underenrolment of Black and Hispanic/Latino participants relative to US population benchmarks. Standardised reporting and intentional, equity-focused recruitment are needed to enhance representativeness and interpretability of SSc trial findings.
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.