Park Christina K, Alhusayen Raed
Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Dermatol Online J. 2018 Feb 15;24(2):13030/qt62d6v7c5.
Although most investigators would agree that including minority races in clinical trials is important, recruitment and retention may differ among these populations. The objective of this review was to perform an audit of phase III dermatologic therapy trials to determine representation for minority groups and to explore the possibility of racial allocation bias. In this review of 11 dermatology or general medicine journals in 2015-16, we did not find evidence of systemic racial allocation bias. We did however note variation in the proportion of minority races included in studies; whereas some trials had high success in recruiting minorities, many did not. Furthermore, most studies did not provide information on individual racial groups and rather presented an 'other' category. This supports findings from previous reviews of dermatologic therapy trials that suggest that most participants are white, race data are not included for many studies, and there is underrepresentation of some racial groups. We conclude that although there is no evidence of racial allocation bias in the previous two years, there remains a need for standardization in the reporting of racial groups and for increased participant diversity in dermatologic therapy trials.
尽管大多数研究人员都认同在临床试验中纳入少数种族很重要，但这些人群在招募和留用方面可能存在差异。本综述的目的是对III期皮肤病治疗试验进行审查，以确定少数群体的代表性，并探讨种族分配偏倚的可能性。在对2015 - 16年11种皮肤病学或普通医学期刊的综述中，我们未发现系统性种族分配偏倚的证据。然而，我们确实注意到研究中纳入的少数种族比例存在差异；虽然一些试验在招募少数群体方面取得了很大成功，但许多试验并非如此。此外，大多数研究没有提供关于各个种族群体的信息，而是呈现了一个“其他”类别。这支持了先前皮肤病治疗试验综述的结果，即大多数参与者是白人，许多研究未纳入种族数据，且一些种族群体的代表性不足。我们得出结论，尽管在过去两年中没有种族分配偏倚的证据，但在种族群体报告的标准化以及增加皮肤病治疗试验参与者的多样性方面仍有必要。
