Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 174

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Involving South Asian patients in clinical trials

Open access
Hussain-Gambles, M, Leese, B, Atkin, K, Brown, J, Mason, S, Tovey, P·2004·Health Technology Assessment

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate how South Asian patients conceptualise the notion of clinical trials and to identify key processes that impact on trial participation and the extent to which communication difficulties, perceptions of risk and attitudes to authority influence these decisions. Also to identify whether 'South Asian' patients are homogeneous in these issues, and which factors differ between different South Asian subgroups and finally how professionals regard the involvement of South Asian patients and their views on strategies to increase participation. DATA SOURCES: A review of the literature on minority ethnic participation in clinical trials was followed by three qualitative interview studies. Interviews were taped and transcribed (and translated if required) and subjected to framework analysis. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 25 health professionals; 60 South Asian lay people who had not taken part in a trial and 15 South Asian trial participants. RESULTS: Motivations for trial participation were identified as follows: to help society, to improve own health or that of family and friends, out of obligation to the doctor and to increase scientific knowledge. Deterrents were concerns about drug side-effects, busy lifestyles, language, previous bad experiences, mistrust and feelings of not belonging to British society. There was no evidence of antipathy amongst South Asians to the concept of clinical trials and, overall, the younger respondents were more knowledgeable than the older ones. Problems are more likely to be associated with service delivery. Lack of being approached was a common response. Lay-reported factors that might affect South Asian participation in clinical trials include age, language, social class, feeling of not belonging/mistrust, culture and religion. Awareness of clinical trials varied between each group. There are more similarities than differences in attitudes towards clinical trial participation between the South Asian and the general population. Important decisions, such as participation in clinical trials, are likely to be made by those family members who are fluent in English and younger. Social class appears to be more important than ethnicity, and older South Asian people and those from working class backgrounds appear to be more mistrustful. Approachable patients (of the same gender, social class and fluent in English) tend to be 'cherry picked' to clinical trials. This practice was justified because of a lack of time and resources and inadequate support. South Asian patients might be systematically excluded from trials owing to the increased cost and time associated with their inclusion, particularly in relation to the language barrier. Under-representation might also be due to passive exclusion associated with cultural stereotypes. Other characteristics such as gender, age, educational level and social class can also affect trial inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Effective strategies for South Asian recruitment to clinical trials include: using multi-recruitment strategies; defining the demographic and social profiles of the population to be included; using focus groups to identify any potential barriers; consulting representative community members to provide assistance in the study; ensuring eligibility criteria are set as wide as possible; developing educational and recruitment approaches to attract ethnic minority health professionals; ensuring health professionals are adequately trained in culturally and ethnically orientated service provision; determining the most effective mass media to use in study promotion and recruitment; and targeting inner-city, single-handed practices likely to have high ethnic minority populations. Future research should consider: responses when invited to participate; the role of methodological and organisational barriers to recruitment; the complexities of recruitment from a health professional perspective; developing culturally sensitive research methods; the magnitude of the problem of under-recruitment; strategies to encourage inner-city, single-handed GP participation; and other factors affecting trial inclusion, such as age, gender, educational level and socio-cultural background.

Overview

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 · 10.3310/hta8420

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 174

Metadata

Authors
Hussain-Gambles, M., Leese, B., Atkin, K., Brown, J., Mason, S., & Tovey, P.
Venue
Health Technology Assessment
Published
2004-10
Volume
8
Issue
42
Pages
iii, 1-109
ISSN
  • 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
  • 2046-4924
OpenAlex
W2127248119
Cited by
174
References
12
FWCI
4.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Involving South Asian patients in clinical trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3310/hta8420
The paper
Hussain-Gambles, M., Leese, B., Atkin, K., Brown, J., Mason, S., & Tovey, P. (2004). Involving South Asian patients in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta8420

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.