1. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Despite pressing need, survey finds most Americans unlikely to enroll in clinical trials. ScienceDaily, 23 May 2016.
2. Murthy, VH, Krumholz, HM, Gross, CP. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. Journal of American Medical Association 2004; 291: 2720–2726.
3. Williams, M, et al. Minority participation in randomized controlled trials for obsessive-compulsive disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 2010; 24: 171–177.
4. Wilder, J, et al. A systematic review of race and ethnicity in hepatitis C clinical trial enrollment. Journal of the National Medical Association 2016; 108: 24–29.
5. Kon, AA. The clinical and translational science award (CTSA) consortium and the translational research model. The American Journal of Bioethics 2008; 8: 58–60.
7. Garcia, S, et al. Thoracic oncology clinical trial eligibility criteria and requirements continue to increase in number and complexity. Journal of Thoracic Oncology 2017; 12: 1489–1495.
8. Byrne, MM, et al. Participation in cancer clinical trials: why are patients not participating? Medical Decision Making 2014; 34: 116–126.
9. George, S, Duran, N, Norris, K. A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to minority research participation among African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders. American Journal of Public Health 2014; 104: e16–e31.
10. Ford, ME, et al. Unequal burden of disease, unequal participation in clinical trials: solutions from African American and Latino community members. Health & Social Work 2013; 38: 29–38.
11. Bryant, J, et al. A consumer register: an acceptable and cost-effective alternative for accessing patient populations. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2016; 16: 134.
12. Callard, F, et al. Developing a new model for patient recruitment in mental health services: a cohort study using electronic health records. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e005654.
13. LeBlanc, J, et al. Impact of a permission to contact (PTC) platform on biobank enrollment and efficiency. Biopreservation and Biobanking 2013; 11: 144–148.
14. Cheah, S, et al. Permission to contact (PTC)—a strategy to enhance patient engagement in translational research. Biopreservation and Biobanking 2013; 11: 245–252.
15. Menikoff, J, Kaneshiro, J, Pritchard, I. The common rule, updated. New England Journal of Medicine 2017; 376: 613–615.
17. Marshall, EA, et al. A population-based approach for implementing change from opt-out to opt-in research permissions. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0168223.
18. Gliklich, R, Dreyer, N, Leavy, M. Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide, 2 Vols (prepared by the outcome DEcIDE center [outcome sciences, inc., a quintiles company] under contract no. 290 2005 00351 TO7) AHRQ publication no. 13 (14)-EHC111. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2014.
19. Druce, I, et al. Implementation of a consent for chart review and contact and its impact in one clinical centre. Journal of Medical Ethics 2015; 41: 425–428.
20. Rimel, B, et al. A novel clinical trial recruitment strategy for women’s cancer. Gynecologic Oncology. 2015; 138: 445–448.
21. Irizarry, T, et al. Patient portals and patient engagement: a state of the science review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2015; 17: e148.
23. Goldzweig, CL, et al. Electronic patient portals: evidence on health outcomes, satisfaction, efficiency, and attitudes: a systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine 2013; 159: 677–687.
24. Liverman, CT, et al. The CTSA Program at NIH: Opportunities for Advancing Clinical and Translational Research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2013.
25. Patton, MQ. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc, 1990.
26. Stewart, DW, Shamdasani, PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice, Vol. 20. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2014.