We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Members of many racial and ethnic population subgroups are underrepresented in clinical trials and research. We present perspectives on barriers and facilitators to study participation gathered from Hispanic participants in a population-based genetic screening study.
Methods:
Seven focus groups (five in English and two in Spanish) were conducted with self-identified Hispanic participants of the Healthy Oregon Project (HOP), a large population-based cohort of adults residing in Oregon. HOP study participants complete surveys about cancer and chronic disease risks with the option to donate a saliva sample for no-cost genetic risk screening for inherited disorders. HOP invited Hispanic participants via email to join a focus group about their experiences. Focus groups, generally lasting 60–90 minutes, occurred in person and virtually. Notes were coded and content-analyzed.
Findings:
49 Hispanic adults participated in the focus groups (37 women; 9 men; 3 non-binary people). Identified facilitators for HOP study participation were trust in the academic medical center leading the study, having a family member who was impacted by cancer, and receiving free genetic screening. Identified barriers were difficulty completing the family history survey, lack of understanding or familiarity with research, immigration status, and navigating technology challenges. Recommendations to improve recruitment of Hispanic populations included promoting the study at community events, clinics, or schools, simplifying the consenting process and providing patient-focused videos to demonstrate study tasks, providing real-time sample tracking, and offering monetary incentives.
Discussion:
Our findings can inform strategies for bolstering recruitment of Hispanic adults in biomedical research studies.
The partnership between a research community engagement team (CE Team) and a community advisory board (CAB) formed the basis for bidirectional communication in developing resources for participant recruitment in a DNA integrity study. Engaging with a minoritized community, this partnership focused on respect, accessibility, and expanded engagement.
Methods:
A ten-member CAB, working in two groups defined by meeting time convenience, provided insight and feedback to the CE Team in the creation of recruitment and consent materials, via an iterative design process in which one CAB group reviewed and enhanced materials, and the second group tested and refined them further. The continuous analysis of CE Team notes from CAB meetings captured information needed both for materials refinement and implementation of CAB-suggested activities.
Results:
The partnership resulted in the co-creation of recruitment and consent materials that facilitated the enrollment of 191 individuals into the study. The CAB encouraged and assisted in expanded engagement inclusive of community leaders. This broader engagement provided information about the DNA integrity study to community decision-makers as well as responded to questions and concerns about the research. The bidirectional communication between the CAB and the CE Team encouraged the researchers to consider topics and research interests related to the current study but also responsive to community concerns.
Conclusions:
The CAB helped the CE Team develop a better understanding of the language of partnership and respect. In this way, the partnership opened doors for expanded community engagement and effective communication with potential study participants.
Rapid antigen detection tests (Ag-RDT) for SARS-CoV-2 with emergency use authorization generally include a condition of authorization to evaluate the test’s performance in asymptomatic individuals when used serially. We aim to describe a novel study design that was used to generate regulatory-quality data to evaluate the serial use of Ag-RDT in detecting SARS-CoV-2 virus among asymptomatic individuals.
Methods:
This prospective cohort study used a siteless, digital approach to assess longitudinal performance of Ag-RDT. Individuals over 2 years old from across the USA with no reported COVID-19 symptoms in the 14 days prior to study enrollment were eligible to enroll in this study. Participants throughout the mainland USA were enrolled through a digital platform between October 18, 2021 and February 15, 2022. Participants were asked to test using Ag-RDT and molecular comparators every 48 hours for 15 days. Enrollment demographics, geographic distribution, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates are reported.
Key Results:
A total of 7361 participants enrolled in the study, and 492 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, including 154 who were asymptomatic and tested negative to start the study. This exceeded the initial enrollment goals of 60 positive participants. We enrolled participants from 44 US states, and geographic distribution of participants shifted in accordance with the changing COVID-19 prevalence nationwide.
Conclusions:
The digital site-less approach employed in the “Test Us At Home” study enabled rapid, efficient, and rigorous evaluation of rapid diagnostics for COVID-19 and can be adapted across research disciplines to optimize study enrollment and accessibility.
Chapter 2 outlines our approach to the study in detail. It provides an overview of the study participants, how we sought participants, and some of the challenges we faced in finding participants. The chapter also explores what it means to undertake qualitative longitudinal research with a relational focus. We explore time and emotional burdens on participants, the emotion work of interviewing people trying to conceive a first child, the gendered dimensions of the project, and our rationale for interviewing women and men separately. The chapter also explores how we analysed our data, focusing on sharing the detailed narratives of the participants across time and between and within couples and their parents.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.