Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Asthma Clinical Trials: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

IF 5.8 2区 医学 Q1 ALLERGY
Rachel Hazlitt, Khanh Nguyen, Andrew Wilson, Payton Clark, Merhawit Ghebrehiwet, Josh Autaubo, Natalie Turner, Bradley Anderson, Alicia Ito Ford, Matt Vassar
{"title":"Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Asthma Clinical Trials: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.","authors":"Rachel Hazlitt, Khanh Nguyen, Andrew Wilson, Payton Clark, Merhawit Ghebrehiwet, Josh Autaubo, Natalie Turner, Bradley Anderson, Alicia Ito Ford, Matt Vassar","doi":"10.1016/j.anai.2025.05.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health inequity exists across the scientific and medical community, specifically in the development and design of clinical trials. There is a lack of diversity and representation of historically marginalized groups in the current landscape of clinical research, and our primary objective for this study was to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for historically marginalized patients in asthma clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the extent to which asthma clinical trials employ recruitment and retention strategies that promote diversity and to identify persistent gaps in the representation of historically marginalized populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a search of major databases - MEDLINE and Embase - to identify clinical trials that performed various interventions and treatment modalities for asthma. Screening and data extraction were performed in a masked and duplicate fashion to limit error. General study characteristics along with recruitment and retention strategies were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>121 clinical trials were included in our study. Of the included studies, forty-two (42/121, 34.7%) reported the use of retention and recruitment strategies. Eighteen (18/121, 14.9%) studies explicitly stated their diversity goals for the participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Approximately one-third of studies reported the use of recruitment strategies; however, the overall implementation and standardization of these strategies remain low in asthma clinical trials. Standardization of recruitment and retention methodologies combined with well-defined recruitment objectives is necessary to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion in clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":50773,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2025.05.022","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Health inequity exists across the scientific and medical community, specifically in the development and design of clinical trials. There is a lack of diversity and representation of historically marginalized groups in the current landscape of clinical research, and our primary objective for this study was to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for historically marginalized patients in asthma clinical trials.

Objective: To evaluate the extent to which asthma clinical trials employ recruitment and retention strategies that promote diversity and to identify persistent gaps in the representation of historically marginalized populations.

Methods: We performed a search of major databases - MEDLINE and Embase - to identify clinical trials that performed various interventions and treatment modalities for asthma. Screening and data extraction were performed in a masked and duplicate fashion to limit error. General study characteristics along with recruitment and retention strategies were recorded.

Results: 121 clinical trials were included in our study. Of the included studies, forty-two (42/121, 34.7%) reported the use of retention and recruitment strategies. Eighteen (18/121, 14.9%) studies explicitly stated their diversity goals for the participants.

Conclusion: Approximately one-third of studies reported the use of recruitment strategies; however, the overall implementation and standardization of these strategies remain low in asthma clinical trials. Standardization of recruitment and retention methodologies combined with well-defined recruitment objectives is necessary to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion in clinical trials.

哮喘临床试验的多样性、公平性和包容性:一项横断面分析。
背景:健康不平等存在于整个科学界和医学界,特别是在临床试验的开发和设计中。在当前的临床研究中,历史边缘化群体缺乏多样性和代表性,本研究的主要目的是评估哮喘临床试验中历史边缘化患者的招募和保留策略。目的:评估哮喘临床试验采用促进多样性的招募和保留策略的程度,并确定在历史上边缘化人群的代表性方面存在的持续差距。方法:我们检索了主要数据库MEDLINE和Embase,以确定对哮喘进行各种干预和治疗方式的临床试验。筛选和数据提取以屏蔽和重复的方式进行,以限制错误。一般研究特征以及招募和保留策略被记录下来。结果:121项临床试验纳入我们的研究。在纳入的研究中,42项(42/ 121,34.7%)报告了挽留和招聘策略的使用。18项(18/121,14.9%)研究明确表示了他们对参与者的多样性目标。结论:大约三分之一的研究报告了招募策略的使用;然而,在哮喘临床试验中,这些策略的总体实施和标准化程度仍然很低。标准化的招募和保留方法与明确的招募目标相结合,对于提高临床试验的多样性、公平性和包容性是必要的。
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
6.50
自引率
6.80%
发文量
437
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology is a scholarly medical journal published monthly by the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The purpose of Annals is to serve as an objective evidence-based forum for the allergy/immunology specialist to keep up to date on current clinical science (both research and practice-based) in the fields of allergy, asthma, and immunology. The emphasis of the journal will be to provide clinical and research information that is readily applicable to both the clinician and the researcher. Each issue of the Annals shall also provide opportunities to participate in accredited continuing medical education activities to enhance overall clinical proficiency.
×
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