Measuring trust in medical research: Perspectives from racial and ethnic communities underrepresented in research.

INTRODUCTION

Underrepresentation of diverse populations in medical research undermines generalizability, exacerbates health disparities, and erodes trust in research institutions. This study aimed to identify a suitable survey instrument to measure trust in medical research among Black and Latino communities in Baltimore, Maryland.

METHODS

Based on a literature review, a committee selected two validated instruments for community evaluation: Perceptions of Research Trustworthiness (PoRT) and Trust in Medical Researchers (TiMRs). Both were translated into Spanish through a standardized process. Thirty-four individuals participated in four focus groups (two in English, two in Spanish). Participants reviewed and provided feedback on the instruments' relevance and clarity. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Initial reactions to the instruments were mixed. While 68% found TiMR easier to complete, 74% preferred PoRT. Key discussion themes included the relevance of the instrument for measuring trust, clarity of the questions, and concerns about reinforcing negative perceptions of research. Participants felt that PoRT better aligned with the research goal of measuring community trust in research, though TiMR was seen as easier to understand. Despite PoRT's lower reading level, some items were found to be more confusing than TiMR items.

CONCLUSION

Community feedback highlighted the need to differentiate trust in medical research, researchers, and institutions. While PoRT and TiMR are acceptable instruments for measuring trust in medical research, refinement of both may be beneficial. Development and validation of instruments in multiple languages is needed to assess community trust in research and inform strategies to improve diverse participation in research.