CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Ethics in Clinical ResearchRace, Genetics, and SocietyHealth disparities and outcomes

Participation in biomedical research studies and cancer screenings: perceptions of risks to minorities compared with whites

Open access
Katz, Ralph V., Wang, Min Qi, Green, B. Lee, Kressin, Nancy R., Claudio, Cristina, Russell, Stefanie Luise, Sommervil, Christelle·2008·Cancer Control
DOI 10.1177/107327480801500409PMC PMC2702154
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This analysis was conducted to determine whether there is a difference among blacks, Hispanics, and whites in their perception of risks associated with participating in either a biomedical study or a cancer screening. METHODS: The Tuskegee Legacy Project Questionnaire, which focused on research subject participation, was administered in two different surveys (1999-2000 and 2003) in seven cities. The Cancer Screening Questionnaire was administered in 2003 in three cities. RESULTS: The study sample across the three surveys consisted of 1,064 blacks, 781 Hispanics, and 1,598 non-Hispanic whites. Response rates ranged from 44% to 70% by city. Logistic regression analyses, adjusted for age, sex, education, income, and city, revealed that blacks and Hispanics each self-reported that minorities, compared with whites, are more likely to be "taken advantage of" in biomedical studies and much less likely to get a "thorough and careful examination" in a cancer screening (odds ratios ranged from 3.6 to 14.2). CONCLUSIONS: Blacks and Hispanics perceive equally high levels of risk for participating in cancer screening examinations and for volunteering to become research subjects in biomedical studies. This perception provides a strong message about the need to overtly address this critical health disparities issue.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/107327480801500409

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The low response rate may be explained by cultural issues such as low awareness of the importance of research, which may explain poor participation rates in biomedical research previously reported in Hispanic minorities.

    “Finally, the low response rate observed may be explained by cultural issues such as the low awareness of the importance of research, which may explain the poor participation rates in biomedical research studies that have been previously reported in Hispanic minorities (44).”

    From Patients’ report on how endometriosis affects health, work, and daily life (2010) · cites this paper as [44]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Katz, R. V., Wang, M. Q., Green, B. L., Kressin, N. R., Claudio, C., Russell, S. L., & Sommervil, C.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
  • VA Boston Healthcare System (US)
  • University of Puerto Rico System (PR)
ORCID
Venue
Cancer Control
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2008-10
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
344-351
ISSN
1073-2748 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/107327480801500409
PMC
PMC2702154
OpenAlex
W2164061808
Cited by
35
References
58
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Cancer Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (P50DE010592, U54DE014257)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
research participation, cancer screening, risk perception, racial and ethnic minorities, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, health disparities, research ethics, trust in healthcare
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Patient Participation, Logistic Models, Research Subjects, Biomedical Research, Black People, White People

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