纳入试验:回顾未吸取的教训。

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Paris B Adkins-Jackson, Nancy J Burke, Patricia Rodriguez Espinosa, Juliana M Ison, Susan D Goold, Lisa G Rosas, Chyke A Doubeni, The Stop Covid-California Alliance Trial Participation And Vaccine Hesitancy Working Groups, Arleen F Brown
{"title":"纳入试验:回顾未吸取的教训。","authors":"Paris B Adkins-Jackson,&nbsp;Nancy J Burke,&nbsp;Patricia Rodriguez Espinosa,&nbsp;Juliana M Ison,&nbsp;Susan D Goold,&nbsp;Lisa G Rosas,&nbsp;Chyke A Doubeni,&nbsp;The Stop Covid-California Alliance Trial Participation And Vaccine Hesitancy Working Groups,&nbsp;Arleen F Brown","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxac007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic revealed weaknesses in the public health infrastructure of the United States, including persistent barriers to engaging marginalized communities toward inclusion in clinical research, including trials. Inclusive participation in clinical trials is crucial for promoting vaccine confidence, public trust, and addressing disparate health outcomes. A long-standing body of literature describes the value of community-based participatory research in increasing marginalized community participation in research. Community-based participatory research emphasizes shared leadership with community members in all phases of the research process, including in the planning and implementation, interpretation, and dissemination. Shared leadership between academic and industry with marginalized communities can assist with inclusive participation in vaccine trials and increase public trust in the development of the vaccines and other therapies used during public emergencies. Nevertheless, epidemiologic and clinical research do not yet have a strong culture of community partnership in the scientific process, which takes time to build and therefore may be difficult to develop and rapidly scale to respond to the pandemic. We outline practices that contribute to a lack of inclusive participation and suggest steps that trialists and other researchers can take to increase marginalized communities' participation in research. Practices include planning for community engagement during the planning and recruitment phases, having regular dialogues with communities about their priorities, supporting them throughout a study, and navigating complex structural determinants of health. Additionally, we discuss how research institutions can support inclusive practices by reexamining their policies to increase participation in clinical trials and instilling institutional trustworthiness.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7c/75/mxac007.PMC9494445.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inclusionary Trials: A Review of Lessons Not Learned.\",\"authors\":\"Paris B Adkins-Jackson,&nbsp;Nancy J Burke,&nbsp;Patricia Rodriguez Espinosa,&nbsp;Juliana M Ison,&nbsp;Susan D Goold,&nbsp;Lisa G Rosas,&nbsp;Chyke A Doubeni,&nbsp;The Stop Covid-California Alliance Trial Participation And Vaccine Hesitancy Working Groups,&nbsp;Arleen F Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/epirev/mxac007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic revealed weaknesses in the public health infrastructure of the United States, including persistent barriers to engaging marginalized communities toward inclusion in clinical research, including trials. Inclusive participation in clinical trials is crucial for promoting vaccine confidence, public trust, and addressing disparate health outcomes. A long-standing body of literature describes the value of community-based participatory research in increasing marginalized community participation in research. Community-based participatory research emphasizes shared leadership with community members in all phases of the research process, including in the planning and implementation, interpretation, and dissemination. Shared leadership between academic and industry with marginalized communities can assist with inclusive participation in vaccine trials and increase public trust in the development of the vaccines and other therapies used during public emergencies. Nevertheless, epidemiologic and clinical research do not yet have a strong culture of community partnership in the scientific process, which takes time to build and therefore may be difficult to develop and rapidly scale to respond to the pandemic. We outline practices that contribute to a lack of inclusive participation and suggest steps that trialists and other researchers can take to increase marginalized communities' participation in research. Practices include planning for community engagement during the planning and recruitment phases, having regular dialogues with communities about their priorities, supporting them throughout a study, and navigating complex structural determinants of health. Additionally, we discuss how research institutions can support inclusive practices by reexamining their policies to increase participation in clinical trials and instilling institutional trustworthiness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologic Reviews\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7c/75/mxac007.PMC9494445.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxac007\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxac007","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: 5

摘要

2019冠状病毒病大流行暴露了美国公共卫生基础设施的弱点,包括在让边缘化社区参与包括试验在内的临床研究方面存在持续障碍。临床试验的包容性参与对于促进疫苗信心、公众信任和解决不同的健康结果至关重要。长期存在的文献描述了社区参与性研究在增加边缘化社区参与研究方面的价值。基于社区的参与性研究强调在研究过程的所有阶段,包括在规划和执行、解释和传播方面,与社区成员共同领导。学术界和产业界与边缘化社区共同发挥领导作用,有助于包容性地参与疫苗试验,并增加公众对开发在突发公共事件期间使用的疫苗和其他疗法的信任。然而,流行病学和临床研究在科学进程中尚未形成强有力的社区伙伴关系文化,这种文化需要时间来建立,因此可能难以发展和迅速扩大规模,以应对这一流行病。我们概述了导致缺乏包容性参与的做法,并提出了试验人员和其他研究人员可以采取的步骤,以增加边缘化社区对研究的参与。实践包括在规划和招聘阶段规划社区参与,定期与社区就其优先事项进行对话,在整个研究过程中为社区提供支持,以及处理复杂的健康结构性决定因素。此外,我们讨论了研究机构如何通过重新审视他们的政策来增加临床试验的参与和灌输机构的可信度来支持包容性实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inclusionary Trials: A Review of Lessons Not Learned.

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed weaknesses in the public health infrastructure of the United States, including persistent barriers to engaging marginalized communities toward inclusion in clinical research, including trials. Inclusive participation in clinical trials is crucial for promoting vaccine confidence, public trust, and addressing disparate health outcomes. A long-standing body of literature describes the value of community-based participatory research in increasing marginalized community participation in research. Community-based participatory research emphasizes shared leadership with community members in all phases of the research process, including in the planning and implementation, interpretation, and dissemination. Shared leadership between academic and industry with marginalized communities can assist with inclusive participation in vaccine trials and increase public trust in the development of the vaccines and other therapies used during public emergencies. Nevertheless, epidemiologic and clinical research do not yet have a strong culture of community partnership in the scientific process, which takes time to build and therefore may be difficult to develop and rapidly scale to respond to the pandemic. We outline practices that contribute to a lack of inclusive participation and suggest steps that trialists and other researchers can take to increase marginalized communities' participation in research. Practices include planning for community engagement during the planning and recruitment phases, having regular dialogues with communities about their priorities, supporting them throughout a study, and navigating complex structural determinants of health. Additionally, we discuss how research institutions can support inclusive practices by reexamining their policies to increase participation in clinical trials and instilling institutional trustworthiness.

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
Epidemiologic Reviews
Epidemiologic Reviews 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: Epidemiologic Reviews is a leading review journal in public health. Published once a year, issues collect review articles on a particular subject. Recent issues have focused on The Obesity Epidemic, Epidemiologic Research on Health Disparities, and Epidemiologic Approaches to Global Health.
×
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