Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Facilitators of research registry enrollment and potential variation by race and gender

  • Crystal M. Glover (a1) (a2), Christina Creel-Bulos (a3), Lisa M. Patel (a4), Scarlett Ellis During (a5), Karen L. Graham (a2), Yadira Montoya (a2), Susan Frick (a2), Judy Phillips (a2) and Raj C. Shah (a2) (a6)...

Abstract

Introduction

Little is known about what motivates people to enroll in research registries. The purpose of this study is to identify facilitators of registry enrollment among diverse older adults.

Methods

Participants completed an 18-item Research Interest Assessment Tool. We used logistic regression analyses to examine responses across participants and by race and gender.

Results

Participants (N=374) were 58% black, 76% women, with a mean age of 68.2 years. All participants were motivated to maintain their memory while aging. Facilitators of registry enrolled varied by both race and gender. Notably, blacks (estimate=0.71, p<0.0001) and women (estimate=0.32, p=0.03) were more willing to enroll in the registry due to home visits compared with whites and men, respectively.

Conclusions

Researchers must consider participant desire for maintaining memory while aging and home visits when designing culturally tailored registries.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article 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 sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent 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.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Facilitators of research registry enrollment and potential variation by race and gender
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Facilitators of research registry enrollment and potential variation by race and gender
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and 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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Facilitators of research registry enrollment and potential variation by race and gender
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in anymedium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Address for correspondence: C. M. Glover, PhD, Department of Behavioral Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, 1750 West Harrison Street, Suite 1000, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. (Email: Crystal_Glover@rush.edu)

References

Hide All
1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Participant recruitment for research [Internet] [cited Sep 5, 2018]. (https://healthit.ahrq.gov/ahrq-funded-projects/emerging-lessons/participant-recruitment-research)
2. Briel, M, et al. A systematic review of discontinued trials suggested that most reasons for recruitment failure were preventable. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2016; 80: 815.
3. Grill, JD, Galvin, JE. Facilitating Alzheimer’s disease research recruitment. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders 2014; 28: 18.
4. Reidy, MC, Orpinas, P, Davis, M. Successful recruitment and retention of Latino study participants. Health Promotion Practice 2012; 13: 779787.
5. Arfken, CL, Balon, R. Declining participation in research studies. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 2011; 80: 325328.
6. Giffin, RB, Lebovitz, Y, English, RA. (eds). Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2010.
7. Krischer, J, et al. Experience with direct-to-patient recruitment for enrollment into a clinical trial in a rare disease: a web-based study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2017; 19: e50.
8. Herrera, AP, et al. Disparate inclusion of older adults in clinical trials: priorities and opportunities for policy and practice change. American Journal of Public Health 2010; 100: S105S112.
9. Evelyn, B, et al. Participation of racial/ethnic groups in clinical trials and race-related labeling: a review of new molecular entities approved 1995-1999. Journal of the National Medical Association 2001; 93(Suppl): 18S24S.
10. The Federal Interagency Forum on Aging-Related Statistics. Older Americans 2016: Key indicators of well-being, 2016. Washington, DC.
11. Hutchins, LF, et al. Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. New England Journal of Medicine 1999; 341: 20612067.
12. Administration for Community Living. Minority aging [Internet], August 3, 2017 [cited Aug 27, 2018]. (https://www.acl.gov/aging-and-disability-in-america/data-and-research/minority-aging)
13. 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: e16e31.
14. Hall, LN, et al. Promoting retention: African American older adults in a research volunteer registry. Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine 2016; 2: 19.
15. Nicholson, LM, Schwirian, PM, Groner, JA. Recruitment and retention strategies in clinical studies with low-income and minority populations: progress from 2004–2014. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2015; 45: 3440.
16. Tu, SP, et al. Clinical trials: understanding and perceptions of female Chinese‐American cancer patients. Cancer 2005; 104: 29993005.
17. Neugroschl, J, et al. Attitudes and perceptions of research in aging and dementia in an urban minority population. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease 2016; 53: 6972.
18. Bishop, WP, et al. Effectiveness of a community research registry to recruit minority and underserved adults for health research. Clinical and Translational Science 2015; 8: 8284.
19. Lauer, MS, D’Agostino, RB. The randomized registry trial—the next disruptive technology in clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 2013; 369: 15791581.
20. Moreno-John, G, et al. Ethnic minority older adults participating in clinical research. Journal of Aging and Health 2004; 16(Suppl.): 93S123S.
21. Grill, JD, et al. Constructing a local potential participant registry to improve Alzheimer’s disease clinical research recruitment. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease 2018; 63(3): 10551063.
22. Jefferson, AL, et al. Clinical research participation among aging adults enrolled in an Alzheimer’s Disease Center research registry. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease 2011; 23: 443452.
23. Frew, PM, et al. The likelihood of participation in clinical trials can be measured: the Clinical Research Involvement Scales. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2010; 63: 11101117.
24. Lee, SB, et al. Participation in clinical research registries: a focus group study examining views from patients with arthritis and other chronic illnesses. Arthritis Care & Research 2016; 68: 974980.
25. Chadiha, LA, et al. Building a registry of research volunteers among older urban African Americans: recruitment processes and outcomes from a community-based partnership. The Gerontologist 2011; 51(Suppl. 1): S106S115.
26. Katapodi, MC, et al. Recruiting families at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer from a statewide cancer registry: a methodological study. Cancer Causes & Control 2017; 28: 191201.
27. Hoque, DME, et al. Impact of clinical registries on quality of patient care and health outcomes: protocol for a systematic review. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e010654.
28. Sariyar, M, et al. A practical framework for data management processes and their evaluation in population-based medical registries. Informatics for Health and Social Care 2013; 38: 104119.
29. Krysinska, K, et al. Dementia registries around the globe and their applications: a systematic review. Alzheimer’s & Dementia 2017; 13: 10311047.
30. Williams, B, et al. Promoting research participation: Why not advertise altruism? Social Science & Medicine 2008; 66: 14511456.
31. Aneshensel, CS, Harig, F, Wight, RG. Aging, neighborhoods, and the built environment. In: George LK, Ferraro KF, eds. Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences (Eighth Edition). New York: Academic Press, 2016, pp. 315–335.
32. McCambridge, J, Kypri, K, Elbourne, D. Research participation effects: a skeleton in the methodological cupboard. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2014; 67: 845849.
33. Garza, MA, et al. The influence of race and ethnicity on becoming a human subject: factors associated with participation in research. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications 2017; 7: 5763.
34. Luebbert, R, Perez, A. Barriers to clinical research participation among African Americans. Journal of Transcultural Nursing 2016; 27: 456463.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed