Gaps in diversity and inclusion reporting in United States knee injury clinical trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Faith Hendrickson, Caleb Uhunmwangho, Christian Hemmerich, Garrett Jones, J. Tyler Babek, Haley Howard, Jake Checketts, Alicia Ito Ford, Matt Vassar
{"title":"Gaps in diversity and inclusion reporting in United States knee injury clinical trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Faith Hendrickson,&nbsp;Caleb Uhunmwangho,&nbsp;Christian Hemmerich,&nbsp;Garrett Jones,&nbsp;J. Tyler Babek,&nbsp;Haley Howard,&nbsp;Jake Checketts,&nbsp;Alicia Ito Ford,&nbsp;Matt Vassar","doi":"10.1002/jeo2.70255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Diversity and inclusion in clinical trials are critical for increasing the generalizability of research. Our objective was to examine the diversity and inclusion of historically marginalized populations in clinical trials focused on knee injuries in the United States.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Our systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diversity and representation of clinical trials concerning knee injuries published between 2018 and 2023. Published manuscripts of relevant knee injury clinical trials were identified using the medical literature databases MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase (Elsevier). Two masked authors independently completed data screening and extraction. We evaluated studies using the Clinical trial Diversity Rating framework to assess their inclusion across multiple demographic characteristics.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 13 studies met the inclusion criteria for the final meta-analysis. Only 1 out of 13 (7.7%) received a ‘Fair’ representation score for race/ethnicity participation, and 1 out of 13 (7.7%) received a ‘Poor’ representation score. The remaining 11 out of 13 (84.6%) studies did not report information on the race/ethnicity of their participants. Eight out of 13 (61.5%) trials received a ‘Good’ representation score when evaluating the inclusion of males and females, 3/13 (23.1%) were ‘Fair’ and 2/13 (15.4%) were ‘Poor’. None of the studies reported the number of participants aged ≥65 years.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results of this study highlight a lack of demographic reporting in knee injury clinical trials, with the included studies consistently failing to report information about the race/ethnicity and age breakdown of participants. The lack of diversity goals and insufficient reporting of racial and ethnic minority populations underscores the necessity for strategic approaches going forward to ensure clinical trials are more inclusive and representative of the incidence of knee injuries in the population.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\n \n <p>Level III, systematic review and meta-analysis.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics","volume":"12 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jeo2.70255","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeo2.70255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Diversity and inclusion in clinical trials are critical for increasing the generalizability of research. Our objective was to examine the diversity and inclusion of historically marginalized populations in clinical trials focused on knee injuries in the United States.

Methods

Our systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diversity and representation of clinical trials concerning knee injuries published between 2018 and 2023. Published manuscripts of relevant knee injury clinical trials were identified using the medical literature databases MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase (Elsevier). Two masked authors independently completed data screening and extraction. We evaluated studies using the Clinical trial Diversity Rating framework to assess their inclusion across multiple demographic characteristics.

Results

A total of 13 studies met the inclusion criteria for the final meta-analysis. Only 1 out of 13 (7.7%) received a ‘Fair’ representation score for race/ethnicity participation, and 1 out of 13 (7.7%) received a ‘Poor’ representation score. The remaining 11 out of 13 (84.6%) studies did not report information on the race/ethnicity of their participants. Eight out of 13 (61.5%) trials received a ‘Good’ representation score when evaluating the inclusion of males and females, 3/13 (23.1%) were ‘Fair’ and 2/13 (15.4%) were ‘Poor’. None of the studies reported the number of participants aged ≥65 years.

Conclusion

The results of this study highlight a lack of demographic reporting in knee injury clinical trials, with the included studies consistently failing to report information about the race/ethnicity and age breakdown of participants. The lack of diversity goals and insufficient reporting of racial and ethnic minority populations underscores the necessity for strategic approaches going forward to ensure clinical trials are more inclusive and representative of the incidence of knee injuries in the population.

Level of Evidence

Level III, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract Image

美国膝关节损伤临床试验中多样性和包容性报告的差距:系统回顾和荟萃分析
临床试验的多样性和包容性对提高研究的普遍性至关重要。我们的目的是研究美国膝关节损伤临床试验中历史边缘化人群的多样性和包容性。我们的系统综述和荟萃分析评估了2018年至2023年间发表的有关膝关节损伤的临床试验的多样性和代表性。使用医学文献数据库MEDLINE (PubMed)和Embase(爱思唯尔)对相关膝关节损伤临床试验发表的手稿进行鉴定。两位蒙面作者独立完成数据筛选和提取。我们使用临床试验多样性评级框架评估研究,以评估其在多种人口统计学特征中的包容性。结果共有13项研究符合最终meta分析的纳入标准。13人中只有1人(7.7%)在种族/民族参与方面获得了“公平”代表得分,13人中有1人(7.7%)获得了“糟糕”代表得分。13项研究中的其余11项(84.6%)没有报告参与者的种族/民族信息。在评估男性和女性的纳入时,13项试验中有8项(61.5%)获得了“良好”的代表性得分,3/13(23.1%)为“公平”,2/13(15.4%)为“差”。没有一项研究报告年龄≥65岁的受试者人数。本研究的结果强调了膝关节损伤临床试验缺乏人口统计报告,纳入的研究始终未能报告参与者的种族/民族和年龄细分信息。多样性目标的缺乏和对少数种族和少数民族人群报告的不足强调了采取战略方法的必要性,以确保临床试验更具包容性和代表性。证据水平III级,系统评价和荟萃分析。
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
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
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