CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 29Ethics in Clinical ResearchCommunity Health and DevelopmentColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection

Barriers to and Facilitators of Recruitment of Adult African American Men for Colorectal Cancer Research: An Instrumental Exploratory Case Study

Open access
Rogers, Charles R., Matthews, Phung, Brooks, Ellen, Le Duc, Nathan, Washington, Chasity, McKoy, Alicia, Edmonson, Al, Lange, LaJune +1 more·2021·JCO Oncology Practice
DOI 10.1200/op.21.00008PMC PMC8258132
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: Racial and ethnic minorities remain underrepresented in research and clinical trials. Better understanding of the components of effective minority recruitment into research studies is critical to understanding and reducing health disparities. Research on recruitment strategies for cancer-specific research—including colorectal cancer (CRC)—among African American men is particularly limited. We present an instrumental exploratory case study examining successful and unsuccessful strategies for recruiting African American men into focus groups centered on identifying barriers to and facilitators of CRC screening completion. METHODS: The parent qualitative study was designed to explore the social determinants of CRC screening uptake among African American men 45-75 years of age. Recruitment procedures made use of community-based participatory research strategies combined with built community relationships, including the use of trusted community members, culturally tailored marketing materials, and incentives. RESULTS: Community involvement and culturally tailored marketing materials facilitated recruitment. Barriers to recruitment included limited access to public spaces, transportation difficulties, and medical mistrust leading to reluctance to participate. CONCLUSION: The use of strategies such as prioritizing community relationship building, partnering with community leaders and gatekeepers, and using culturally tailored marketing materials can successfully overcome barriers to the recruitment of African American men into medical research studies. To improve participation and recruitment rates among racial and ethnic minorities in cancer-focused research studies, future researchers and clinical trial investigators should aim to broaden recruitment, strengthen community ties, offer incentives, and use multifaceted approaches to address specific deterrents such as medical mistrust and economic barriers.

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 · 10.1200/op.21.00008

Cites

59 of 59 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 Tuskegee Syphilis study and the Henrietta Lacks incident are examples of unethical and exploitative research.

    “Two infamous examples of such unethical and exploitative research are often quoted: the Tuskegee Syphilis study, in which Black men were intentionally denied treatment for syphilis; and the Henrietta Lacks (HeLa) incident, where the patient’s cancer cells were provided to researchers unbeknownst to her.”

    From Enablers and barriers of clinical trial participation in adult patients from minority ethnic groups: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Background (page not provided) identifies the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis as a historical event that fostered distrust of medical research. Our copy does not mention Henrietta Lacks or describe the specific acts in the citing sentence—intentional denial of syphilis treatment or use of cancer cells without the patient’s knowledge. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • A frequently cited reason for underrepresentation of certain minority ethnic groups in clinical trials is pervasive mistrust in the healthcare system, often attributed to historical instances of mistreatment and exploitation.

    “A frequently cited reason for the underrepresentation of certain minority ethnic groups in clinical trials is a pervasive mistrust in the healthcare system. This is often attributed to historical instances of mistreatment and exploitation.”

    From Enablers and barriers of clinical trial participation in adult patients from minority ethnic groups: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [37]Kähkönen AK: Conducting a case study in supply management. Operations Supply Chain Manag Int J 4:31-41, 2011 [Google Scholar]
  2. [39]Zainal Z: Case study as a research method. J Kemanusiaan 5, 2007. https://jurnalkemanusiaan.utm.my/index.php/kemanusiaan/article/view/165 [Google Scholar]
  3. [42]National Institutes of Health : Single IRB Policy for Multi-Site Research. https://grants.nih.gov/policy/humansubjects/single-irb-policy-multi-site-research.htm, 2020 [Google Scholar]
  4. [51]Multifaceted Connections: African-American Media Usage Outpaces Across Platforms. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/multifaceted-connections-african-american-media-usage-outpaces-across-platforms.html, 2015 [Google Scholar]
  5. [52]African Americans and Technology Use: A Demographic Portrait. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2014/01/African-Americans-and-Technology-Use.pdf, 2014 [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Rogers, C. R., Matthews, P., Brooks, E., Le Duc, N., Washington, C., McKoy, A., Edmonson, A., Lange, L., & Fetters, M. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Utah (US)
  • Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT
  • The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (US)
  • Columbus Eye Surgery Center (US)
  • International Leadership Institute, Minneapolis, MN
  • University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Venue
JCO Oncology Practice
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Published
2021-05
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
e686-e694
ISSN
  • 2688-1527 (ISSN-L)
  • 2688-1535
DOI
10.1200/op.21.00008
PMC
PMC8258132
OpenAlex
W3161761961
Cited by
28
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3
FWCI
3.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JCO Oncology Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (K01CA234319)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Keywords
research recruitment, African American men, colorectal cancer screening, recruitment barriers, minority participation in clinical trials, community-based participatory research, medical mistrust, transportation barriers, health disparities, incentives
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Black or African American, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Minority Groups, Pilot Projects, Colorectal Neoplasms, Trust

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