Suppr超能文献

生物样本采集认知方面的种族/民族差异:罗切斯特大学癌症中心全国性美国国立癌症研究所社区肿瘤学研究项目研究

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Comprehension of Biospecimen Collection: a Nationwide University of Rochester Cancer Center NCI Community Oncology Research Program Study.

作者信息

Asare Matthew, Heckler Charles E, Culakova Eva, Kamen Charles S, Kleckner Amber S, Minasian Lori M, Wendler David S, Feige Michelle, Weil Carol J, Long Joan, Cole Sharon K, Onitilo Adedayo A, Peppone Luke J, Morrow Gary R, Janelsins Michelle C

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Robbins College of Health and Human Sciences, Baylor University, One Bear Place, Waco, TX, 97343, USA.

James P. Wilmot Cancer Institute, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.

出版信息

J Cancer Educ. 2020 Apr;35(2):292-300. doi: 10.1007/s13187-018-1464-z.

Abstract

To examine whether (a) non-minority participants differed from racial minority participants in the understanding of biospecimens collected for research purposes, (b) patients differed from comparison group in their understanding of the ways their biospecimens could be used by researchers, and (c) participants received adequate information before consenting to donate blood for research studies. We analyzed cross-sectional data from female breast cancer patients scheduled to receive chemotherapy at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) clinical sites and a healthy comparison group. After reading a consent form related to biospecimens and consenting to participate in a clinical trial, participants' understanding of biospecimen collection was evaluated. Linear models were used to compare scores between non-minority and racial minority participants as well as cancer and non-cancer comparisons adjusting for possible confounding factors. A total of 650 participants provided evaluable data; 592 were non-minority (Caucasian) and 58 participants were a racial minority (71% Black and 29% other). There were 427 cancer patients and 223 comparisons. Non-minority participants scored higher than racial minorities on relevance-to-care items (diff. = 0.48, CI 0.13-0.80, p = 0.001). Comparison group scored higher than cancer patients on relevance-to-care items (diff. = 0.58, CI 0.37-0.78). A moderate number of the participants exhibited a poor understanding of biospecimen collection across all racial/ethnic backgrounds, but racial minority participants' scores remained lower in the relevance-to-care subscale even after adjusting for education and reading level. Differences were also noted among the patients and comparison group. Researchers should facilitate comprehension of biospecimen collection for all study participants, especially racial minority participants.

摘要

为了研究

(a)非少数族裔参与者与少数族裔参与者在对为研究目的收集的生物样本的理解上是否存在差异;(b)患者与对照组在对研究人员使用其生物样本方式的理解上是否存在差异;以及(c)参与者在同意为研究献血之前是否获得了充分的信息。我们分析了来自美国国立癌症研究所(NCI)社区肿瘤学研究项目(NCORP)临床站点计划接受化疗的女性乳腺癌患者以及一个健康对照组的横断面数据。在阅读与生物样本相关的同意书并同意参与一项临床试验后,评估参与者对生物样本采集的理解。使用线性模型比较非少数族裔和少数族裔参与者之间以及癌症患者与非癌症对照之间的得分,并对可能的混杂因素进行调整。共有650名参与者提供了可评估的数据;592名是非少数族裔(白人),58名是少数族裔(71%为黑人,29%为其他)。有427名癌症患者和223名对照。在与护理相关性项目上,非少数族裔参与者的得分高于少数族裔(差异=0.48,CI 0.13 - 0.80,p = 0.001)。对照组在与护理相关性项目上的得分高于癌症患者(差异=0.58,CI 0.37 - 0.78)。在所有种族/族裔背景中,有相当数量的参与者对生物样本采集的理解较差,但即使在调整教育程度和阅读水平后,少数族裔参与者在与护理相关性子量表上的得分仍然较低。在患者和对照组之间也发现了差异。研究人员应为所有研究参与者,尤其是少数族裔参与者,促进对生物样本采集的理解。

相似文献

2
Enhancing Biospecimen Knowledge Among Health Care Providers and Representatives From Community Organizations.
Health Promot Pract. 2017 Sep;18(5):715-725. doi: 10.1177/1524839916641069. Epub 2016 Apr 26.
3
Enrollment and biospecimen collection in a multiethnic family cohort: the Northern California site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry.
Cancer Causes Control. 2019 Apr;30(4):395-408. doi: 10.1007/s10552-019-01154-6. Epub 2019 Mar 5.
4
Biospecimen donation among black and white breast cancer survivors: opportunities to promote precision medicine.
J Cancer Surviv. 2018 Feb;12(1):74-81. doi: 10.1007/s11764-017-0646-8. Epub 2017 Nov 16.
5
Patient Preferences for Use of Archived Biospecimens from Oncology Trials When Adequacy of Informed Consent Is Unclear.
Oncologist. 2020 Jan;25(1):78-86. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0365. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
6
Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities.
JAMA. 2004 Jun 9;291(22):2720-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.22.2720.
8
Racial and Ethnic Disparities Among Participants in Precision Oncology Clinical Studies.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 1;4(11):e2133205. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.33205.

引用本文的文献

1
Selection biases in the systematic collection of breast biobank specimens.
NPJ Breast Cancer. 2025 Aug 1;11(1):83. doi: 10.1038/s41523-025-00798-9.
2
Factors Associated With Minority Patient Enrollment in a Gastric Cancer Biobank.
J Surg Res. 2025 Feb;306:230-238. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2024.12.002. Epub 2025 Jan 10.

本文引用的文献

1
Broad Consent for Research on Biospecimens: The Views of Actual Donors at Four U.S. Medical Centers.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018 Apr;13(2):115-124. doi: 10.1177/1556264617751204. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
2
Inclusion of diverse populations in genomic research and health services: Genomix workshop report.
J Community Genet. 2017 Oct;8(4):267-273. doi: 10.1007/s12687-017-0317-5. Epub 2017 Jul 28.
3
Community Perceptions of Biobanking Participation: A Qualitative Study among Mexican-Americans in Three Texas Cities.
Public Health Genomics. 2017;20(1):46-57. doi: 10.1159/000452093. Epub 2016 Dec 8.
4
Barriers and Strategies to Participation in Tissue Research Among African-American Men.
J Cancer Educ. 2017 Mar;32(1):51-58. doi: 10.1007/s13187-015-0905-1.
5
Broad Consent for Research With Biological Samples: Workshop Conclusions.
Am J Bioeth. 2015;15(9):34-42. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1062162.
6
Disparities in knowledge and willingness to donate research biospecimens: a mixed-methods study in an underserved urban community.
J Community Genet. 2014 Oct;5(4):329-36. doi: 10.1007/s12687-014-0187-z. Epub 2014 Apr 26.
8
Engaging diverse populations about biospecimen donation for cancer research.
J Community Genet. 2014 Oct;5(4):313-27. doi: 10.1007/s12687-014-0186-0. Epub 2014 Mar 25.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验