Voices From the Black Community: Hepatitis C Research Participation
Voices From the Black Community: Beliefs and Attitudes on Participating in Research Studies for Chronic Hepatitis C
研究概览
地位
条件
详细说明
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.
研究类型
注册 (实际的)
联系人和位置
学习地点
-
-
North Carolina
-
Chapel Hill、North Carolina、美国、27599
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
-
-
参与标准
资格标准
适合学习的年龄
接受健康志愿者
有资格学习的性别
取样方法
研究人群
描述
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
学习计划
研究是如何设计的?
设计细节
研究衡量的是什么?
主要结果指标
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Willingness to Participate (WTP) Mean Score
大体时间: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
|
次要结果测量
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
Perceived Benefits/Advantages of Participating in Health/Medical Research Mean Score
大体时间: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
大体时间: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
大体时间: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
大体时间: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
大体时间: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
大体时间: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
|
其他结果措施
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
Proportion of Participant Recommendations for Strategies
大体时间: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
|
合作者和调查者
调查人员
- 首席研究员:Donna M Evon, PhD、University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
研究记录日期
研究主要日期
学习开始 (实际的)
初级完成 (实际的)
研究完成 (实际的)
研究注册日期
首次提交
首先提交符合 QC 标准的
首次发布 (实际的)
研究记录更新
最后更新发布 (实际的)
上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新
最后验证
更多信息
与本研究相关的术语
其他相关的 MeSH 术语
其他研究编号
- 18-0662
计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)
计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?
IPD 计划说明
药物和器械信息、研究文件
研究美国 FDA 监管的药品
研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品
此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.