Denne siden ble automatisk oversatt og nøyaktigheten av oversettelsen er ikke garantert. Vennligst referer til engelsk versjon for en kildetekst.

Voices From the Black Community: Hepatitis C Research Participation

29. juni 2020 oppdatert av: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Voices From the Black Community: Beliefs and Attitudes on Participating in Research Studies for Chronic Hepatitis C

This is a one-time cross-sectional survey study of approximately 200 self-identified black or African-American patients who have had chronic hepatitis C viral infection (HCV) that will evaluate patients' willingness to participate (WTP) in health/medical research related to HCV and attitudinal factors that might be associated with WTP, such as benefits and barriers to research participation, mistrust of physicians/researchers, health literacy, and knowledge of health/research studies.

Studieoversikt

Status

Fullført

Detaljert beskrivelse

Chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection is three times more prevalent in the African American/black (AA) population than in white patients in the U.S.; yet minorities are woefully under-represented in HCV research, particularly in Phase III drug registration trials. A recent systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT) of HCV treatments with interferon-based treatments from 2000 to 2011 found that the proportion of African-American patients in RCTs ranged from 0% - 11%. Despite significant increases in efficacy and reductions in adverse events associated with the new direct acting antiviral (DAA) regimens, the proportion of black patients enrolled in Phase II-III DAA registration trials has not increased dramatically and generally ranges from 1%-18%. Because participation rates in medical research do not fully represent the overall U.S. population or prevalence rates among various subgroups, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has mandated pharmaceutical companies to improve demographic subgroups included in clinical trials, to identify barriers to subgroup enrollment in clinical trials, and to employ strategies to encourage greater participation.

Enrolling more diverse patients in medical research, especially racial minorities, is a ubiquitous dilemma that has received a fair amount of scientific attention in the last 10 years. This research has found an important role for the perceptions and attitudes that people have about participating in clinical research. Negative perceptions serve as barriers to enrollment in clinical research, while positive attitudes are facilitators of research participation. Additionally, knowledge gaps, patient-provider communication, health literacy, and mistrust of research and scientists are a few of the commonly reported barriers to participation among minority patients. To our knowledge, no study has been undertaken with black patients with HCV to understand their specific attitudes and perspectives related to participation in HCV-related health or medical research. This information is a prerequisite to developing effective approaches to increasing participation of the black community in HCV-related health or medical research.

Two hundred Black patients will be recruited. Patients who participated in The Patient-Reported Outcomes Project of HCV-TARGET ("PROP UP TARGET") study will be invited to participate. Patients will also be recruited from liver clinics at one medical center. Patients will respond to several survey questions over the phone or in person related to WTP and attitudinal factors related to clinical research.

Participant responses and characteristics will be summarized using graphical and tabular descriptive statistical methods such as sample means, percentiles, frequencies, proportions and standard deviations. All statistical estimates will be reported with confidence intervals.

Studietype

Observasjonsmessig

Registrering (Faktiske)

200

Kontakter og plasseringer

Denne delen inneholder kontaktinformasjon for de som utfører studien, og informasjon om hvor denne studien blir utført.

Studiesteder

    • North Carolina
      • Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Forente stater, 27599
        • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Deltakelseskriterier

Forskere ser etter personer som passer til en bestemt beskrivelse, kalt kvalifikasjonskriterier. Noen eksempler på disse kriteriene er en persons generelle helsetilstand eller tidligere behandlinger.

Kvalifikasjonskriterier

Alder som er kvalifisert for studier

21 år til 99 år (Voksen, Eldre voksen)

Tar imot friske frivillige

Nei

Kjønn som er kvalifisert for studier

Alle

Prøvetakingsmetode

Ikke-sannsynlighetsprøve

Studiepopulasjon

Patients who self-identify as black or African-American and have been infected with chronic hepatitis C viral (HCV) infection. Patients will be recruited from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Project (PROP UP) observational study (11 U.S. liver centers) and from a tertiary care liver HCV clinic.

Beskrivelse

Inclusion Criteria

  • Previous enrollment in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Project (PROP UP) or recruited from HCV Liver Clinics at the University of North Carolina.
  • Self-identified as African-American or Black during the PROP UP study or in-person
  • Provide written or verbal permission to be contacted about future research studies

Exclusion Criteria

  • Express unwillingness to be contacted about future studies
  • Withdrew from PROP UP post-enrollment (eg. death, patient withdrawal)
  • Unwilling or unable to provide verbal consent
  • Identifies during the phone survey or in-person that he/she is not African-American or Black

Studieplan

Denne delen gir detaljer om studieplanen, inkludert hvordan studien er utformet og hva studien måler.

Hvordan er studiet utformet?

Designdetaljer

Hva måler studien?

Primære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Overall Willingness to Participate (WTP) Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Overall Willingness to Participate Scale (WTP): WTP in research studies was evaluated using 13 items to assess WTP in different types of health/medical research studies. Responses were based on a five-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all willing) to 5 (very willing), with 3 connoting "unsure/neutral." The overall WTP score will be calculated for each participant by taking the mean of the 13 items. Higher scores indicate higher WTP.
through study completion, an average of 1 day

Sekundære resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Perceived Benefits/Advantages of Participating in Health/Medical Research Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Perceived Benefits Scale: Patients respond to 16 items regarding perceived benefits or advantages of research participation. Each item is rated on a 5 point likert scale: 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=unsure, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree. The average of all items will be used to create the total mean benefit score. Higher scores indicate higher Perceived Benefits.
through study completion, an average of 1 day
Perceived Barriers/Disadvantages of Participating in Health/Medical Research Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Perceived Barriers Scale: Patients respond to 12 items regarding barriers or disadvantages of research participation. Each item is rated on a 5 point likert scale: 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=unsure, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree. The average of all items will be used to create the total mean barrier score. Higher scores indicate higher Perceived Barriers.
through study completion, an average of 1 day
Perceived Trust in Doctors Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Trust in Doctors Scale: Patients respond to 12 items regarding their trust or mistrust in their medical providers. Each item is rated on a 5 point likert scale: 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=unsure, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree. Negative items were reverse scored. The average of all items will be used to create the total mean trust score. Higher scores indicate higher Perceived Trust.
through study completion, an average of 1 day
Perceived Health Literacy Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Perceived Health Literacy Scale: Three items assessed the health literacy of participants with a five-point response scale: 1 (Never), 2 (Rarely), 3 (Sometimes), 4 (Often), 5 (Always). Participants were asked (a) how frequently they asked others to help them read medical materials, (b) if they felt uncomfortable filling out medical forms, and (c) if they did not understand their medical condition due to difficulty reading medical materials. The average of all items will be used to create the total mean health literacy score. Lower scores indicate higher Perceived Health Literacy.
through study completion, an average of 1 day
Subjective Knowledge of Health/Medical Research Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Subjective Knowledge Scale: Participants were asked how well they felt they understood what health/medical research involved. This was assessed on a five-point response scale: 1 (Not at all), 2 (Not too well), 3 (Somewhat well), 4 (Pretty well), 5 (Very well). The average of all items will be used to create the total mean subjective knowledge score. Higher scores indicate higher subjective knowledge.
through study completion, an average of 1 day
Objective Knowledge of Health/Medical Research Mean Score
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Objective Knowledge Scale: Knowledge of clinical trials was measured with 10 true/false questions about aspects of clinical trials. The proportion of correct responses per patient will be recorded. Higher proportion indicates higher objective knowledge.
through study completion, an average of 1 day

Andre resultatmål

Resultatmål
Tiltaksbeskrivelse
Tidsramme
Proportion of Participant Recommendations for Strategies
Tidsramme: through study completion, an average of 1 day
Open-ended qualitative question to solicit participants' recommendations for strategies to enhance racial diversity in HCV-related research studies. Responses will be categorized into different recommendation strategies and proportion of patients who listed a strategy in that category will be reported.
through study completion, an average of 1 day

Samarbeidspartnere og etterforskere

Det er her du vil finne personer og organisasjoner som er involvert i denne studien.

Samarbeidspartnere

Etterforskere

  • Hovedetterforsker: Donna M Evon, PhD, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Studierekorddatoer

Disse datoene sporer fremdriften for innsending av studieposter og sammendragsresultater til ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieposter og rapporterte resultater gjennomgås av National Library of Medicine (NLM) for å sikre at de oppfyller spesifikke kvalitetskontrollstandarder før de legges ut på det offentlige nettstedet.

Studer hoveddatoer

Studiestart (Faktiske)

21. februar 2019

Primær fullføring (Faktiske)

15. mai 2020

Studiet fullført (Faktiske)

19. juni 2020

Datoer for studieregistrering

Først innsendt

11. desember 2019

Først innsendt som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

16. desember 2019

Først lagt ut (Faktiske)

17. desember 2019

Oppdateringer av studieposter

Sist oppdatering lagt ut (Faktiske)

1. juli 2020

Siste oppdatering sendt inn som oppfylte QC-kriteriene

29. juni 2020

Sist bekreftet

1. juni 2020

Mer informasjon

Begreper knyttet til denne studien

Plan for individuelle deltakerdata (IPD)

Planlegger du å dele individuelle deltakerdata (IPD)?

NEI

IPD-planbeskrivelse

There is no plan at this time to make individual participant data available to other researchers.

Legemiddel- og utstyrsinformasjon, studiedokumenter

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-regulert medikamentprodukt

Nei

Studerer et amerikansk FDA-regulert enhetsprodukt

Nei

Denne informasjonen ble hentet direkte fra nettstedet clinicaltrials.gov uten noen endringer. Hvis du har noen forespørsler om å endre, fjerne eller oppdatere studiedetaljene dine, vennligst kontakt register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en endring er implementert på clinicaltrials.gov, vil denne også bli oppdatert automatisk på nettstedet vårt. .

Kliniske studier på Hepatitt C, kronisk

3
Abonnere