Cited by 158Ethics in Clinical ResearchMental Health Treatment and AccessCultural Competency in Health Care

Barriers to recruiting ethnic minorities to mental health research: a systematic review

Open access
Brown, Gillian, Marshall, Max, Bower, Peter, Woodham, Adrine, Waheed, Waquas·2014·International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research

Abstract

Disparities in the prevalence of mental illness are widely reported for people from ethnic minorities. Unlike the United States, there is no legislation for clinical research in the UK to mandate the inclusion of ethnic minorities and they are underrepresented in European trials compared with those conducted in the United States. This restricts generalization of research findings. This systematic review of the barriers to the recruitment of ethnic minority participants into psychiatric research is based on a comprehensive literature search. Nine included papers explore such barriers based on the authors’ and participants’ experiences of research. These barriers are mainly categorized as: participant related, practical issues, family/community related, health service related and research process issues. This review provides a compilation of important barriers to recruitment which can facilitate future research. The barriers that were identified are not all unique to participants from ethnic minorities, although the way in which they manifest themselves is often distinct in minority groups. It is important that these barriers are considered when designing research design so that solutions to overcome such obstacles can be incorporated in research protocols from the start and appropriate resources allocated. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd .

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mpr.1434

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, G., Marshall, M., Bower, P., Woodham, A., & Waheed, W.
Affiliations
  • Division of Psychiatry, School of Medicine University of Manchester Manchester UK
  • University of Manchester (GB)
Venue
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-01-28
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
36-48
ISSN
  • 1049-8931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-0657
OpenAlex
W2139259838
Cited by
158
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UBIR (University of Greater Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • Edge Hill University Research Information Repository (Edge Hill University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council (MR/K025635/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Cultural Competency in Health Care
Keywords
ethnic minorities, research recruitment, barriers to participation, mental health research, underrepresentation in clinical trials, health disparities, health service barriers, research design, participant experiences
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Humans, Mental Health, Minority Groups, Research Design, Patient Selection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review