Understanding Barriers to Clinical Trial Participation Among U.S. Women: A National Survey Study
Fida, D.; Rajasekera, T. A.; Roy, A.; Wilson, J. C.; Wiley, A.; Lederman, R.; Spagnolo, P. A.
Show abstract
Despite the persistent underrepresentation of women--particularly those from racially and ethnically minoritized groups--in clinical research, little is known about their perspectives on participation. This study examined healthcare experiences, access, and attitudes toward clinical trials among U.S. women and assessed how race, socioeconomic status, and healthcare access intersect to shape willingness to participate (WTP). We conducted a national cross-sectional online survey (January-March 2023) of 5,301 women aged 18-70 years. The 81-item questionnaire assessed demographics, health status, healthcare access, and clinical trial experiences. Among 4,987 respondents reporting race (77% White, 14% Black, 7% Asian, 2% Other), nearly 80% expressed interest in participating in clinical trials, yet only 11% had been invited and 7% had enrolled. In adjusted models, WTP was lower among Black ({beta} = -0.06; P = .04) and Asian ({beta} = -0.09; P = .01) women than among White women, whereas higher educational attainment and multimorbidity predicted greater WTP. Altruism, clear study explanations, and financial compensation were key motivators, while time burden and concerns about side effects were major barriers, with the salience of these factors varying by race. Most respondents (88%) endorsed the importance of womens inclusion and sex-specific reporting, though neutrality on these issues was more frequent among racially minoritized women. Despite high interest, structural and informational barriers continue to constrain womens engagement in clinical research, underscoring the need for trust-building, burden-reducing, and culturally responsive strategies to promote equitable participation and improve representation across racial groups.
Matching journals
The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Listening to older voices: Results of a cross-sectional survey of older patient-reported experiences of facility-based healthcare in Nouna, Burkina Faso 91%
- Collecting mortality data via mobile phone surveys: a non-inferiority randomized trial in Malawi 90%
- Use of machine learning methods to understand discussions of female genital mutilation/cutting on social media 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Cohort Profile: A national prospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic outcomes in the U.S. - The CHASING COVID Cohort Study 92%
- COVID-19 risk perceptions of social interaction and essential activities and inequity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative survey 91%
- Development and validation of multivariable prediction models for adverse COVID-19 outcomes in IBD patients 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- COVID-19 outcomes, risk factors and associations by race: a comprehensive analysis using electronic health records data in Michigan Medicine 93%
- Disparities in COVID-19 Reported Incidence, Knowledge, and Behavior 92%
- The Impact of the “Muslim Ban” Executive Order on Healthcare Utilization in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Racial and ethnic disparities for SARS-CoV-2 positivity in the United States: a generalizing pandemic 91%
- Association of Chronic Acid Suppression and Social Determinants of Health with COVID-19 Infection 91%
- SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection in pregnant women: characterization of symptoms and syndromes predictive of disease and severity through real-time, remote participatory epidemiology 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.