Cargando…

Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action

BACKGROUND: Without inclusion of diverse research participants, it is challenging to understand how study findings will translate into the real world. Despite this, a lack of inclusion of those from under-served groups in research is a prevailing problem due to multi-faceted barriers acting at multi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bodicoat, Danielle H., Routen, Ash C., Willis, Andrew, Ekezie, Winifred, Gillies, Clare, Lawson, Claire, Yates, Thomas, Zaccardi, Francesco, Davies, Melanie J., Khunti, Kamlesh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8643184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34863265
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05849-7
_version_ 1784609829287886848
author Bodicoat, Danielle H.
Routen, Ash C.
Willis, Andrew
Ekezie, Winifred
Gillies, Clare
Lawson, Claire
Yates, Thomas
Zaccardi, Francesco
Davies, Melanie J.
Khunti, Kamlesh
author_facet Bodicoat, Danielle H.
Routen, Ash C.
Willis, Andrew
Ekezie, Winifred
Gillies, Clare
Lawson, Claire
Yates, Thomas
Zaccardi, Francesco
Davies, Melanie J.
Khunti, Kamlesh
author_sort Bodicoat, Danielle H.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Without inclusion of diverse research participants, it is challenging to understand how study findings will translate into the real world. Despite this, a lack of inclusion of those from under-served groups in research is a prevailing problem due to multi-faceted barriers acting at multiple levels. Therefore, we rapidly reviewed international published literature, in relation to clinical trials, on barriers relating to inclusion, and evidence of approaches that are effective in overcoming these. METHODS: A rapid literature review was conducted searching PubMed for peer-reviewed articles that discussed barriers to inclusion or strategies to improve inclusion in clinical trial research published between 2010 and 2021. Grey literature articles were excluded. RESULTS: Seventy-two eligible articles were included. The main barriers identified were language and communication, lack of trust, access to trials, eligibility criteria, attitudes and beliefs, lack of knowledge around clinical trials, and logistical and practical issues. In relation to evidence-based strategies and enablers, two key themes arose: [1] a multi-faceted approach is essential [2]; no single strategy was universally effective either within or between trials. The key evidence-based strategies identified were cultural competency training, community partnerships, personalised approach, multilingual materials and staff, communication-specific strategies, increasing understanding and trust, and tackling logistical barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the barriers relating to inclusion are the same as those that impact trial design and healthcare delivery generally. However, the presentation of these barriers among different under-served groups may be unique to each population’s particular circumstances, background, and needs. Based on the literature, we make 15 recommendations that, if implemented, may help improve inclusion within clinical trials and clinical research more generally. The three main recommendations include improving cultural competency and sensitivity of all clinical trial staff through training and ongoing personal development, the need to establish a diverse community advisory panel for ongoing input into the research process, and increasing recruitment of staff from under-served groups. Implementation of these recommendations may help improve representation of under-served groups in clinical trials which would improve the external validity of associated findings. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05849-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8643184
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86431842021-12-06 Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action Bodicoat, Danielle H. Routen, Ash C. Willis, Andrew Ekezie, Winifred Gillies, Clare Lawson, Claire Yates, Thomas Zaccardi, Francesco Davies, Melanie J. Khunti, Kamlesh Trials Methodology BACKGROUND: Without inclusion of diverse research participants, it is challenging to understand how study findings will translate into the real world. Despite this, a lack of inclusion of those from under-served groups in research is a prevailing problem due to multi-faceted barriers acting at multiple levels. Therefore, we rapidly reviewed international published literature, in relation to clinical trials, on barriers relating to inclusion, and evidence of approaches that are effective in overcoming these. METHODS: A rapid literature review was conducted searching PubMed for peer-reviewed articles that discussed barriers to inclusion or strategies to improve inclusion in clinical trial research published between 2010 and 2021. Grey literature articles were excluded. RESULTS: Seventy-two eligible articles were included. The main barriers identified were language and communication, lack of trust, access to trials, eligibility criteria, attitudes and beliefs, lack of knowledge around clinical trials, and logistical and practical issues. In relation to evidence-based strategies and enablers, two key themes arose: [1] a multi-faceted approach is essential [2]; no single strategy was universally effective either within or between trials. The key evidence-based strategies identified were cultural competency training, community partnerships, personalised approach, multilingual materials and staff, communication-specific strategies, increasing understanding and trust, and tackling logistical barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the barriers relating to inclusion are the same as those that impact trial design and healthcare delivery generally. However, the presentation of these barriers among different under-served groups may be unique to each population’s particular circumstances, background, and needs. Based on the literature, we make 15 recommendations that, if implemented, may help improve inclusion within clinical trials and clinical research more generally. The three main recommendations include improving cultural competency and sensitivity of all clinical trial staff through training and ongoing personal development, the need to establish a diverse community advisory panel for ongoing input into the research process, and increasing recruitment of staff from under-served groups. Implementation of these recommendations may help improve representation of under-served groups in clinical trials which would improve the external validity of associated findings. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05849-7. BioMed Central 2021-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8643184/ /pubmed/34863265 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05849-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Methodology
Bodicoat, Danielle H.
Routen, Ash C.
Willis, Andrew
Ekezie, Winifred
Gillies, Clare
Lawson, Claire
Yates, Thomas
Zaccardi, Francesco
Davies, Melanie J.
Khunti, Kamlesh
Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
title Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
title_full Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
title_fullStr Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
title_full_unstemmed Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
title_short Promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
title_sort promoting inclusion in clinical trials—a rapid review of the literature and recommendations for action
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8643184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34863265
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05849-7
work_keys_str_mv AT bodicoatdanielleh promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT routenashc promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT willisandrew promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT ekeziewinifred promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT gilliesclare promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT lawsonclaire promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT yatesthomas promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT zaccardifrancesco promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT daviesmelaniej promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction
AT khuntikamlesh promotinginclusioninclinicaltrialsarapidreviewoftheliteratureandrecommendationsforaction