“我们正在做的最难的部分”:研究人员对让边缘化人群参与药物使用试验的看法。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Kaitlyn Jaffe, Celia B Fisher
{"title":"“我们正在做的最难的部分”:研究人员对让边缘化人群参与药物使用试验的看法。","authors":"Kaitlyn Jaffe, Celia B Fisher","doi":"10.1186/s13011-025-00657-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a critical component of the development of pharmacological treatment options for substance use disorders. Pragmatic trials, in particular, aim to enhance generalizability by testing interventions in real-world settings. However, structural barriers, including socioeconomic marginalization and criminalization, continue to limit research participation among people who use drugs (PWUD). While prior research has explored perspectives of PWUD in research, less is known about how RCT staff navigate obstacles to engaging PWUD who experience structural disadvantage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews with 36 U.S. research staff (i.e., research coordinators; research assistants) working on pragmatic RCTs testing the effectiveness of medications for substance use disorders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Staff described challenges that complicated study enrollment and retention, including mistrust, negative perceptions of study components, restrictive eligibility criteria, and logistical challenges related to transportation, housing, and communication. Despite the more flexible design of pragmatic RCTs, staff still encountered constraints that conflicted with participant needs and necessitated going beyond their role to facilitate inclusion and retention. Research staff also identified important facilitators of recruitment and retention, including relationship building, leveraging referral systems, and adopting flexible, participant-centered approaches, where possible.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Even in pragmatic trials designed for real-world conditions, social and structural disadvantages and rigid research structures can limit study participation among PWUD. Our findings suggest that with support, research staff play a central role in navigating these challenges and devising potential strategies for engaging marginalized populations in research.</p>","PeriodicalId":22041,"journal":{"name":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","volume":"20 1","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12236004/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"The hardest part of what we're doing\\\": research staff perspectives on engaging marginalized populations in substance use trials.\",\"authors\":\"Kaitlyn Jaffe, Celia B Fisher\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13011-025-00657-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a critical component of the development of pharmacological treatment options for substance use disorders. Pragmatic trials, in particular, aim to enhance generalizability by testing interventions in real-world settings. However, structural barriers, including socioeconomic marginalization and criminalization, continue to limit research participation among people who use drugs (PWUD). While prior research has explored perspectives of PWUD in research, less is known about how RCT staff navigate obstacles to engaging PWUD who experience structural disadvantage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews with 36 U.S. research staff (i.e., research coordinators; research assistants) working on pragmatic RCTs testing the effectiveness of medications for substance use disorders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Staff described challenges that complicated study enrollment and retention, including mistrust, negative perceptions of study components, restrictive eligibility criteria, and logistical challenges related to transportation, housing, and communication. Despite the more flexible design of pragmatic RCTs, staff still encountered constraints that conflicted with participant needs and necessitated going beyond their role to facilitate inclusion and retention. Research staff also identified important facilitators of recruitment and retention, including relationship building, leveraging referral systems, and adopting flexible, participant-centered approaches, where possible.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Even in pragmatic trials designed for real-world conditions, social and structural disadvantages and rigid research structures can limit study participation among PWUD. Our findings suggest that with support, research staff play a central role in navigating these challenges and devising potential strategies for engaging marginalized populations in research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12236004/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-025-00657-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-025-00657-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随机对照试验(rct)是物质使用障碍药物治疗方案发展的关键组成部分。务实试验尤其旨在通过在现实世界环境中测试干预措施来提高普遍性。然而,结构性障碍,包括社会经济边缘化和刑事定罪,继续限制吸毒者参与研究。虽然之前的研究已经在研究中探索了PWUD的观点,但对于RCT工作人员如何克服障碍,吸引经历结构性劣势的PWUD,我们知之甚少。方法:我们对36名美国研究人员(即研究协调员;研究助理)从事实用的随机对照试验,测试药物对物质使用障碍的有效性。结果:工作人员描述了使研究注册和保留复杂化的挑战,包括不信任、对研究组成部分的负面看法、限制性资格标准以及与交通、住房和通信相关的后勤挑战。尽管实用的随机对照试验设计更加灵活,但工作人员仍然遇到与参与者需求相冲突的限制,需要超越自己的角色来促进包容和保留。研究人员还确定了招聘和留用的重要促进因素,包括建立关系、利用推荐系统以及尽可能采用灵活的、以参与者为中心的方法。结论:即使在为现实世界条件设计的实用试验中,社会和结构的不利因素以及僵化的研究结构也会限制PWUD的研究参与。我们的研究结果表明,在支持下,研究人员在应对这些挑战和制定让边缘化人群参与研究的潜在战略方面发挥核心作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"The hardest part of what we're doing": research staff perspectives on engaging marginalized populations in substance use trials.

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a critical component of the development of pharmacological treatment options for substance use disorders. Pragmatic trials, in particular, aim to enhance generalizability by testing interventions in real-world settings. However, structural barriers, including socioeconomic marginalization and criminalization, continue to limit research participation among people who use drugs (PWUD). While prior research has explored perspectives of PWUD in research, less is known about how RCT staff navigate obstacles to engaging PWUD who experience structural disadvantage.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 36 U.S. research staff (i.e., research coordinators; research assistants) working on pragmatic RCTs testing the effectiveness of medications for substance use disorders.

Results: Staff described challenges that complicated study enrollment and retention, including mistrust, negative perceptions of study components, restrictive eligibility criteria, and logistical challenges related to transportation, housing, and communication. Despite the more flexible design of pragmatic RCTs, staff still encountered constraints that conflicted with participant needs and necessitated going beyond their role to facilitate inclusion and retention. Research staff also identified important facilitators of recruitment and retention, including relationship building, leveraging referral systems, and adopting flexible, participant-centered approaches, where possible.

Conclusion: Even in pragmatic trials designed for real-world conditions, social and structural disadvantages and rigid research structures can limit study participation among PWUD. Our findings suggest that with support, research staff play a central role in navigating these challenges and devising potential strategies for engaging marginalized populations in research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that encompasses research concerning substance abuse, with a focus on policy issues. The journal aims to provide an environment for the exchange of ideas, new research, consensus papers, and critical reviews, to bridge the established fields that share a mutual goal of reducing the harms from substance use. These fields include: legislation pertaining to substance use; correctional supervision of people with substance use disorder; medical treatment and screening; mental health services; research; and evaluation of substance use disorder programs.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信