Cited by 70Ethics in Clinical ResearchAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Minority inclusion in randomized clinical trials of panic disorder

Mendoza, Dorian B., Williams, Monnica T., Chapman, L. Kevin, Powers, Mark·2012·Journal of Anxiety Disorders

Abstract

In 1993, the National Institutes of Health issued a mandate that funded research must include participation by racial and ethnic minority groups, and researchers were required to include in their proposals strategies by which they would achieve diversity in their samples. A methodological search for randomized clinical trials of panic disorder was conducted to evaluate ethnoracial differences in panic disorder symptoms, rates of minority inclusion in North American studies, and effective methods of minority recruitment. Less than half of the studies identified reported ethnic and racial data for their sample. Of the 21 studies that did report this information (n=2687), 82.7% were European American/non-Hispanic White, 4.9% were African American/Black, 3.4% were Hispanic, 1.1% were Asian American, and 1.4% were another ethnicity. The remaining 6.5% was simply classified as other/non-White. The primary recruitment techniques utilized were clinical referral and advertising, but neither of these methods were correlated with improved minority participation, nor was the number of recruitment sites. As minorities are greatly underrepresented in panic disorder studies, reported treatment outcomes may not generalize to all ethnic and cultural groups. Researchers have not followed NIH guidelines regarding inclusion of special populations. Inclusion of minorities in future studies is needed to fully understand issues related to the treatment of panic disorder in non-White populations. Su…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.janxdis.2012.02.011

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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
Mendoza, D. B., Williams, M. T., Chapman, L. K., & Powers, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Louisville (US)
  • Southern Methodist University (US)
Corresponding author
Williams, Monnica T.
Venue
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-06
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
574-582
ISSN
0887-6185 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158293741
Cited by
70
References
87
Citations by year
2025: 18 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
panic disorder, racial and ethnic minorities, minority recruitment, underrepresentation in clinical trials, recruitment strategies, clinical referral
MeSH terms
Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Research Design, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Panic Disorder, 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