↓ Skip to main content

A review of approaches to improve participation of culturally and linguistically diverse populations in clinical trials

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
24 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A review of approaches to improve participation of culturally and linguistically diverse populations in clinical trials
Published in
Trials, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1384-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jo-anne Hughson, Robyn Woodward-Kron, Anna Parker, John Hajek, Agnese Bresin, Ute Knoch, Tuong Phan, David Story

Abstract

The under-representation of culturally and linguistically diverse participants in clinical trials is an ongoing concern for medical researchers and the community. The aim of this review is to examine the complex issue of recruiting culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) older people to medical research and to examine responses to these issues. The review focuses on (1) trends in the existing literature on barriers to and strategies for recruiting CALD and older people to clinical research, (2) issues with informed consent for CALD populations, and (3) the efficacy of innovative approaches, including approaches incorporating multimedia in research and consent processes. The literature indicates that predominant barriers to greater involvement of CALD patients in clinical trials are communication, including literacy and health literacy considerations; English language competence; and cultural factors in the research setting such as mistrust of consent processes, as well as considerable practical and logistical barriers, including mobility considerations. Some evidence exists that incorporating multimedia resources into the informed consent process can improve patient understanding and is preferred by patients, yet these findings are inconclusive. A multi-methodological approach, including the use of culturally and linguistically sensitive multimedia tools, may help address the issue of low inclusion of CALD groups in clinical research. Researcher education needs to be taken into account to address preconceptions about CALD resistance to research participation and to raise awareness of cultural concerns in regard to research participation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 152 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 14%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 34 22%
Unknown 30 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 18%
Psychology 11 7%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Other 27 18%
Unknown 44 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,342,672
of 21,239,792 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#373
of 5,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,641
of 281,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,239,792 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them