Abstract
Background Latino populations remain vastly underrepresented in clinical and translational research. This study aims to characterize the most common sources of successful participant engagement within our sample.
Methods Between February 2022 and March 2023, research staff systematically recorded how participants learned about an ongoing study (which we term source of successful participant engagement) designed to co-create and implement a COVID-19 testing program in a U.S./Mexico border community. Demographic characteristics were correlated with each source of participant engagement at the univariate level using a chi-squared test and, if significant, were included in a multinomial logistic regression model to determine the association between participant characteristics and source of participant engagement.
Results A total of 2836 individuals responded to questions regarding source of participant engagement; the most common responses were: Word of Mouth (32%), Clinic/Provider referral (32%), and Walk Up (21%). Males were 37% less likely than female participants to report having heard of the study through their Clinic/Provider compared to Walk Up (p<.01). Participants <18 years of age were twice as likely compared to individuals >54 years of age to have learned about the study through Word of Mouth compared to Walk Up (p<.01). Compared to Walk Up, participants who lived in a city adjacent to San Ysidro were 1.5 times more likely to be recruited through their Clinic/Provider (p=.02) or through Word of Mouth (p=.02), compared to neighboring cities. Education and clinical symptoms were not significantly associated with engagement source.
Conclusion Advancing our understanding of sources of successful participant engagement in marginalized communities is necessary to increase equitable participation in clinical and translational research.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Yes
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study received approval from the Institutional Review Board at the University of California San Diego Human Research Protections Program, protocol number 210498. All participants provided informed consent acknowledging potential risks and the voluntary nature of study participation.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, The University of Edinburgh, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos