ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Evaluating toolkits for inclusivity, diversity, equity, and accessibility in clinical trials: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Many toolkits have been developed globally to help researchers design and conduct inclusive clinical trials, but their usability for Canada's diverse population remains unclear. This scoping review aims to evaluate existing toolkits and assess their appropriateness in supporting inclusive clinical trials in Canada. Methods: We will conduct a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed and grey literature from April to August 2025 across multiple databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. Search terms will combine inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility with terms for toolkits and clinical trials. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and full-text reviews will be conducted for eligible studies. Data will be extracted using a standardized form, focusing on toolkit content. We will summarize findings in a matrix and will present the extracted data in a tabular format, allowing easy comparison across toolkits. Discussion: This scoping review aims to assess the relevance and usability of existing toolkits that support inclusive clinical trials, with a specific focus on their applicability to the clinical trials context. Given Canada's diverse population, vast geography, and low participation rates among underrepresented groups, it is essential to determine whether current global resources meet local needs. The findings will help identify content gaps and inform the development of a tailored IDEA toolkit to support equitable and representative clinical research across Canada. Ethics and dissemination: The protocol was registered on the Open Science framework. The findings will be presented at relevant conferences, and the manuscript will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals. Clinical trial registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UDQBJ.
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.