Recruitment and Retention Strategies for Historically Marginalized Populations in Colorectal Cancer Trials: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Using Systematic Review Methods.

IF 1.6 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Harrison Smith, Saad Khan, Andrew Wilson, Josh Autaubo, Payton Clark, Merhawit Ghebrehiwet, Reagan Livingston, Rachael Cobbs, Matt Vassar
{"title":"Recruitment and Retention Strategies for Historically Marginalized Populations in Colorectal Cancer Trials: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Using Systematic Review Methods.","authors":"Harrison Smith, Saad Khan, Andrew Wilson, Josh Autaubo, Payton Clark, Merhawit Ghebrehiwet, Reagan Livingston, Rachael Cobbs, Matt Vassar","doi":"10.1007/s12029-024-01146-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Colorectal cancer (CRC), a leading cause of cancer mortality, disproportionately impacts historically marginalized populations due to persistent health inequities. Effective recruitment and retention strategies are crucial to improving the representation of these populations in clinical trials. This study aims to evaluate the use of recruitment and retention strategies in CRC clinical trials, their impact on participant diversity, and the presence of diversity recruitment goals and ethical considerations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of CRC treatment trials following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were assessed for recruitment and retention strategies, diversity recruitment goals, and ethical considerations. Data were extracted in duplicate, ensuring masked and independent evaluations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 2563 records identified, 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most trials (83.6%) focused on therapeutic interventions, and government funding was the most common (38.2%). Only three studies (5.5%) reported strategies to recruit historically marginalized populations, and 54 studies (98.2%) lacked diversity recruitment goals. None of the trials discussed ethical considerations related to diverse recruitment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights significant gaps in recruitment and retention strategies for historically marginalized populations in CRC clinical trials. Few studies implement strategies to address these disparities which affect the diversity of the trial population, underscoring the need for targeted efforts to improve trial inclusivity. Addressing these gaps is critical to ensuring more equitable and representative outcomes in CRC research.</p>","PeriodicalId":15895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","volume":"56 1","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11588777/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-024-01146-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC), a leading cause of cancer mortality, disproportionately impacts historically marginalized populations due to persistent health inequities. Effective recruitment and retention strategies are crucial to improving the representation of these populations in clinical trials. This study aims to evaluate the use of recruitment and retention strategies in CRC clinical trials, their impact on participant diversity, and the presence of diversity recruitment goals and ethical considerations.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of CRC treatment trials following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were assessed for recruitment and retention strategies, diversity recruitment goals, and ethical considerations. Data were extracted in duplicate, ensuring masked and independent evaluations.

Results: Of the 2563 records identified, 55 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most trials (83.6%) focused on therapeutic interventions, and government funding was the most common (38.2%). Only three studies (5.5%) reported strategies to recruit historically marginalized populations, and 54 studies (98.2%) lacked diversity recruitment goals. None of the trials discussed ethical considerations related to diverse recruitment.

Conclusion: This study highlights significant gaps in recruitment and retention strategies for historically marginalized populations in CRC clinical trials. Few studies implement strategies to address these disparities which affect the diversity of the trial population, underscoring the need for targeted efforts to improve trial inclusivity. Addressing these gaps is critical to ensuring more equitable and representative outcomes in CRC research.

结直肠癌试验中历来被边缘化人群的招募和保留策略:使用系统综述方法进行横断面分析。
目的:结直肠癌(CRC)是癌症死亡的主要原因之一,由于长期存在的健康不公平现象,它对历史上被边缘化的人群造成了极大的影响。有效的招募和保留策略对于提高这些人群在临床试验中的代表性至关重要。本研究旨在评估 CRC 临床试验中招募和保留策略的使用情况、其对参与者多样性的影响以及是否存在多样性招募目标和伦理考虑因素:我们按照 PRISMA 指南对 CRC 治疗试验进行了横断面分析。我们对符合条件的研究进行了评估,包括招募和保留策略、多样性招募目标以及伦理考虑因素。数据提取一式两份,确保了评估的蒙蔽性和独立性:在确定的 2563 条记录中,55 项研究符合纳入标准。大多数试验(83.6%)侧重于治疗干预,政府资助最为常见(38.2%)。只有三项研究(5.5%)报告了招募历史上被边缘化人群的策略,54 项研究(98.2%)缺乏多元化招募目标。没有一项试验讨论了与多元化招募相关的伦理因素:本研究强调了在 CRC 临床试验中,针对历史上被边缘化人群的招募和保留策略存在重大差距。很少有研究实施策略来解决这些影响试验人群多样性的差距,这突出表明需要有针对性地努力提高试验的包容性。解决这些差距对于确保 CRC 研究取得更公平、更具代表性的成果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: The Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer is a multidisciplinary medium for the publication of novel research pertaining to cancers arising from the gastrointestinal tract.The journal is dedicated to the most rapid publication possible.The journal publishes papers in all relevant fields, emphasizing those studies that are helpful in understanding and treating cancers affecting the esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder and biliary tree, pancreas, small bowel, large bowel, rectum, and anus. In addition, the Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer publishes basic and translational scientific information from studies providing insight into the etiology and progression of cancers affecting these organs. New insights are provided from diverse areas of research such as studies exploring pre-neoplastic states, risk factors, epidemiology, genetics, preclinical therapeutics, surgery, radiation therapy, novel medical therapeutics, clinical trials, and outcome studies.In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, the journal also publishes: case reports, state-of-the-art reviews on topics of immediate interest or importance; invited articles analyzing particular areas of pancreatic research and knowledge; perspectives in which critical evaluation and conflicting opinions about current topics may be expressed; meeting highlights that summarize important points presented at recent meetings; abstracts of symposia and conferences; book reviews; hypotheses; Letters to the Editors; and other items of special interest, including:Complex Cases in GI Oncology:  This is a new initiative to provide a forum to review and discuss the history and management of complex and involved gastrointestinal oncology cases. The format will be similar to a teaching case conference where a case vignette is presented and is followed by a series of questions and discussion points. A brief reference list supporting the points made in discussion would be expected.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信