Suppr超能文献

在随机对照试验中增强公平性:来自一项多中心实用临床试验焦点小组的定性分析

Increasing Equity Within Randomized Control Trials: A Qualitative Analysis of Focus Groups From a Multi-Site, Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

作者信息

Harr Elondra D, Rodriguez Ruth D, Baez Jose E, Barnhill Jessica L, Lathren Christine R, Morone Natalia E, Roth Isabel J

机构信息

Program on Integrative Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Department of General Internal Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Glob Adv Integr Med Health. 2025 Jun 5;14:27536130251349111. doi: 10.1177/27536130251349111. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Underrepresentation of diverse populations in clinical trials poses challenges to equity and external validity in health care research. To successfully recruit underrepresented participants in pragmatic clinical trials, researchers must understand the perspectives and needs of individuals from diverse backgrounds who participate in research.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this qualitative study was to gain an understanding of the needs and perspectives of participants of the OPTIMUM trial -- a pragmatic trial evaluating mindfulness-based stress reduction for chronic low back pain.

METHODS

This qualitative study employed focus groups with participants from 3 clinical sites: Boston Medical Center, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the University of Pittsburgh. Focus group discussions centered on participants' experiences, barriers, and facilitators to engagement in the OPTIMUM trial. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis and the rapid qualitative analysis method, Lightning Reports, for real-time feedback integration into the trial process.

RESULTS

Six focus groups were conducted with 46 participants, of whom 39.1% were first-time research participants and 56.5% identified as Black or African American. Qualitative analysis identified five key themes:1) The importance of providers in the recruitment of cLBP patients, (2) Motivators to participate and stay engaged in clinical research, (3) Participant lack of understanding of randomized control trials (RCTs) and general research processes, (4) Desire for social connection and community-building among participants, and (5) the Positive impact of regular study staff interaction.

CONCLUSION

Equity in RCTs requires intentional strategies to address barriers to participation and engagement faced by historically underrepresented populations. Engaging health care providers in recruitment, fostering positive interactions with study staff, and creating opportunities for social connection can improve recruitment, retention, and engagement. Incorporating community-engaged research methods and real-time feedback mechanisms can further support inclusivity and equity in pragmatic clinical trials.

摘要

背景

临床试验中不同人群代表性不足给医疗保健研究中的公平性和外部有效性带来了挑战。为了在务实的临床试验中成功招募代表性不足的参与者,研究人员必须了解来自不同背景参与研究的个人的观点和需求。

目的

这项定性研究的目的是了解OPTIMUM试验参与者的需求和观点,该试验是一项务实试验,评估基于正念减压法对慢性下腰痛的疗效。

方法

这项定性研究采用焦点小组访谈法,参与者来自3个临床地点:波士顿医疗中心、北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校和匹兹堡大学。焦点小组讨论围绕参与者参与OPTIMUM试验的经历、障碍和促进因素展开。使用主题内容分析法和快速定性分析方法“闪电报告”对数据进行分析,以便将实时反馈纳入试验过程。

结果

共进行了6次焦点小组访谈,有46名参与者,其中39.1%是首次参与研究的参与者,56.5%的参与者被认定为黑人或非裔美国人。定性分析确定了五个关键主题:1)医疗服务提供者在招募慢性下腰痛患者中的重要性;2)参与并持续参与临床研究的动机;3)参与者对随机对照试验(RCT)和一般研究过程缺乏了解;4)参与者对社交联系和社区建设的渴望;5)研究工作人员定期互动的积极影响。

结论

随机对照试验中的公平性需要有意采取策略来解决历史上代表性不足人群所面临的参与和融入障碍。让医疗服务提供者参与招募工作、促进与研究工作人员的积极互动以及创造社交联系的机会,可以改善招募、留存率和参与度。纳入社区参与研究方法和实时反馈机制可以进一步支持务实临床试验中的包容性和公平性。

相似文献

1
Increasing Equity Within Randomized Control Trials: A Qualitative Analysis of Focus Groups From a Multi-Site, Pragmatic Clinical Trial.
Glob Adv Integr Med Health. 2025 Jun 5;14:27536130251349111. doi: 10.1177/27536130251349111. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
3
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
7
How to Implement Digital Clinical Consultations in UK Maternity Care: the ARM@DA Realist Review.
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 May 21:1-77. doi: 10.3310/WQFV7425.
8
Participant views and experiences of participating in HIV research in sub-Saharan Africa: a qualitative systematic review.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jun 12;13(5):330-420. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2051.
9
Exercise interventions and patient beliefs for people with hip, knee or hip and knee osteoarthritis: a mixed methods review.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 17;4(4):CD010842. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010842.pub2.
10
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.

本文引用的文献

2
How well do participants in clinical trials represent the U.S. population with chronic neck or back pain?
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 May 27;25(1):414. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07524-9.
6
Motivations for participation in weight loss clinical trials.
Clin Obes. 2023 Oct;13(5):e12604. doi: 10.1111/cob.12604. Epub 2023 May 29.
8
Patient-centered practices for engaging transgender and gender diverse patients in clinical research studies.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021 Oct 1;21(1):202. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01328-4.
10
Addressing Health Equity and Social Determinants of Health Through Healthy People 2030.
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2021;27(Suppl 6):S249-S257. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001297.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验