A scoping review of global patterns in reporting race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion in palliative care randomized controlled trials: Recommendations for transparency.
Gary Witham, Natalie G Regier, Martha Abshire Saylor, Sarah Allgood, Samantha Curriero, Tamryn F Gray, Elifnur Gunes, Bryan R Hansen, Reena Levy, Katie E Nelson, Claire M Petchler, Rebecca Singer Cohen, Rebecca Wright
{"title":"A scoping review of global patterns in reporting race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion in palliative care randomized controlled trials: Recommendations for transparency.","authors":"Gary Witham, Natalie G Regier, Martha Abshire Saylor, Sarah Allgood, Samantha Curriero, Tamryn F Gray, Elifnur Gunes, Bryan R Hansen, Reena Levy, Katie E Nelson, Claire M Petchler, Rebecca Singer Cohen, Rebecca Wright","doi":"10.1177/02692163241291352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Though randomized controlled trials of non-pharmacological palliative care interventions have shown positive outcomes, findings are often generalized with limited consideration for the impact of the influence of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion on said outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify trends and gaps in global reporting of racial, ethnic, nationality, and religious demographics in non-pharmacological palliative care randomized controlled trials.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We conducted a scoping review guided by the Joanna Briggs methodology.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Global randomized controlled trials published in English, between 1999 and 2021 extracted from databases: Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were non-pharmacological palliative care interventions for people with serious conditions reporting on one or more of the demographics of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our review included 131 (44%) articles published from 19 countries, predominantly the USA (<i>n</i> = 84, 64%). Most studies focused on cancer (<i>n</i> = 71, 54%) in inpatient settings (<i>n</i> = 85, 64%). Race was the most commonly reported demographic (<i>n</i> = 93, 70%), followed by ethnicity (<i>n</i> = 54, 41%), religion (<i>n</i> = 46, 35%), nationality (<i>n</i> = 20, 15%). Within racial reporting, 86 (92%) indicating a majority White/Caucasian sample. Only 14 (10%) articles provided context connecting participant demographics to intervention outcomes. Demographic data was discussed only as a limitation to generalizability in 18 cases (41%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Improving greater transparency in study reporting of social and historical context about population demographics, including specific demographic data collected, may better identify unmet palliative needs, facilitate cross-cultural interpretation, and improve adaptation and implementation of non-pharmacological palliative care interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":19849,"journal":{"name":"Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2692163241291352"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241291352","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Though randomized controlled trials of non-pharmacological palliative care interventions have shown positive outcomes, findings are often generalized with limited consideration for the impact of the influence of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion on said outcomes.
Aim: To identify trends and gaps in global reporting of racial, ethnic, nationality, and religious demographics in non-pharmacological palliative care randomized controlled trials.
Design: We conducted a scoping review guided by the Joanna Briggs methodology.
Data sources: Global randomized controlled trials published in English, between 1999 and 2021 extracted from databases: Cochrane, PubMed, and Scopus. Inclusion criteria were non-pharmacological palliative care interventions for people with serious conditions reporting on one or more of the demographics of race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion.
Results: Our review included 131 (44%) articles published from 19 countries, predominantly the USA (n = 84, 64%). Most studies focused on cancer (n = 71, 54%) in inpatient settings (n = 85, 64%). Race was the most commonly reported demographic (n = 93, 70%), followed by ethnicity (n = 54, 41%), religion (n = 46, 35%), nationality (n = 20, 15%). Within racial reporting, 86 (92%) indicating a majority White/Caucasian sample. Only 14 (10%) articles provided context connecting participant demographics to intervention outcomes. Demographic data was discussed only as a limitation to generalizability in 18 cases (41%).
Conclusions: Improving greater transparency in study reporting of social and historical context about population demographics, including specific demographic data collected, may better identify unmet palliative needs, facilitate cross-cultural interpretation, and improve adaptation and implementation of non-pharmacological palliative care interventions.
期刊介绍：
Palliative Medicine is a highly ranked, peer reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to improving knowledge and clinical practice in the palliative care of patients with far advanced disease. This outstanding journal features editorials, original papers, review articles, case reports, correspondence and book reviews. Essential reading for all members of the palliative care team. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
