Representation of racialised and ethnically diverse populations in multicentre randomised controlled trials of GLP-1 medicines for obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of gaps.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Yaanu Jeyakumar, Lisa Richardson, Shohinee Sarma, Ravi Retnakaran, Caroline K Kramer
{"title":"Representation of racialised and ethnically diverse populations in multicentre randomised controlled trials of GLP-1 medicines for obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of gaps.","authors":"Yaanu Jeyakumar, Lisa Richardson, Shohinee Sarma, Ravi Retnakaran, Caroline K Kramer","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Trials of GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) medicines have changed the paradigm of obesity treatment. Diversity in trial participation is imperative considering that obesity disproportionately impacts marginalised populations worldwide. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to evaluate the representation of racialised and ethnically diverse populations in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of GLP-1 medicines for obesity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed/Embase/ClinicalTrials.gov. Prevalence of each racial/ethnic group was compared in relation to the USA, Canada, the UK, Brazil and South Africa. The geographical locations of the trial sites were extracted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>27 RCTs were identified (n=21 547 participants). Meta-analyses of prevalence demonstrated the vast predominance of white/Caucasians (79%) with smaller proportion of blacks (9%), Asians (13%), Indigenous (2%) and Hispanics (22%). The gaps in representation were evidenced by the significantly under-represented proportion of non-white individuals in these RCTs as compared with the prevalence of non-white individuals in the general population of the USA (-23%, p=0.002) and Canada (-34%, p<0.0001), reaching an alarming gap of -58% in relation to Brazil and striking under-representation of -68% as compared with South Africa. Similar discrepancies in proportions of blacks, Asians and Indigenous peoples as compared with reference nations were found. Moreover, the trial sites (n=1859) were predominately located in high-income countries (84.2%), in sharp contrast to the global prevalence of obesity that is predominantly in low-income and middle-income countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There are discrepancies in representation of racialised and ethnically diverse populations in obesity trials as compared with multiethnic populations worldwide. These data highlight the need for broader reform in the research process in order to ultimately address health inequities.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"9 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603712/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-017177","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Trials of GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) medicines have changed the paradigm of obesity treatment. Diversity in trial participation is imperative considering that obesity disproportionately impacts marginalised populations worldwide. We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to evaluate the representation of racialised and ethnically diverse populations in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of GLP-1 medicines for obesity.

Methods: We searched PubMed/Embase/ClinicalTrials.gov. Prevalence of each racial/ethnic group was compared in relation to the USA, Canada, the UK, Brazil and South Africa. The geographical locations of the trial sites were extracted.

Results: 27 RCTs were identified (n=21 547 participants). Meta-analyses of prevalence demonstrated the vast predominance of white/Caucasians (79%) with smaller proportion of blacks (9%), Asians (13%), Indigenous (2%) and Hispanics (22%). The gaps in representation were evidenced by the significantly under-represented proportion of non-white individuals in these RCTs as compared with the prevalence of non-white individuals in the general population of the USA (-23%, p=0.002) and Canada (-34%, p<0.0001), reaching an alarming gap of -58% in relation to Brazil and striking under-representation of -68% as compared with South Africa. Similar discrepancies in proportions of blacks, Asians and Indigenous peoples as compared with reference nations were found. Moreover, the trial sites (n=1859) were predominately located in high-income countries (84.2%), in sharp contrast to the global prevalence of obesity that is predominantly in low-income and middle-income countries.

Conclusion: There are discrepancies in representation of racialised and ethnically diverse populations in obesity trials as compared with multiethnic populations worldwide. These data highlight the need for broader reform in the research process in order to ultimately address health inequities.

肥胖GLP-1药物的多中心随机对照试验中种族化和民族多样化人群的代表性:差距的系统回顾和荟萃分析
GLP-1(胰高血糖素样肽-1)药物的试验已经改变了肥胖治疗的范式。考虑到肥胖对全球边缘人群的影响不成比例,参与试验的多样性势在必行。我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估GLP-1肥胖药物随机对照试验(rct)中种族化和种族多样化人群的代表性。方法:检索PubMed/Embase/ClinicalTrials.gov。每个种族/民族的患病率与美国、加拿大、英国、巴西和南非的患病率进行了比较。提取了试验地点的地理位置。结果:共纳入27项随机对照试验(n=21 547名受试者)。患病率的荟萃分析显示,白人/高加索人占绝大多数(79%),黑人(9%)、亚洲人(13%)、土著(2%)和西班牙裔(22%)的比例较小。与美国(-23%,p=0.002)和加拿大(-34%)的普通人群中非白人个体的患病率相比,这些随机对照试验中非白人个体的代表性明显不足,这证明了代表性的差距。结论:与世界范围内的多种族人群相比,肥胖试验中种族化和民族多样化人群的代表性存在差异。这些数据突出表明,需要在研究过程中进行更广泛的改革,以便最终解决卫生不平等问题。
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
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
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