ArticleJournal of community genetics2026
Strategies to build trustworthiness and increase diversity in colorectal cancer biospecimen research: a multi-phase, multi-site qualitative study.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Detecting and Preventing Fraudulent Participation in Qualitative Research: Content Analysis of Two Multisite Studies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlack, Latino, and American Indian individuals are underrepresented in biospecimen research. Obtaining biospecimens from these populations is particularly relevant for understanding, preventing, and treating colorectal cancer and translating those insights to eliminate persistent racial and ethnic inequities in colorectal cancer. The aim of this qualitative study was to identify information needs and culturally appropriate approaches to biorepository recruitment among Black, Latino, and American Indian patients and community members.
methodsWe used a multi-phase, multi-site design that included key informant interviews and focus groups with patients and community members in Los Angeles, Boston, and South Dakota. We analyzed interview data using rapid qualitative analysis and focus group data using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsWe interviewed 10 keys informants with expertise in the recruitment of racially and ethnically diverse participants into biospecimen research and facilitated 21 focus groups with a 101 patients and community members who identified as Black, Latino, or American Indian. We generated six themes from our analyses that we organized into a best practices framework for building trustworthiness and increasing diversity in biospecimen research: (1) cultural responsiveness and inclusivity; (2) community-based partnerships; (3) convenience and accessibility; (4) meaningful and compelling purpose; (5) mindful incentives; and (6) trusted messengers and information sharing. DISCUSSION: Our findings provide insight into the factors that influence Black, Latino, and American Indian individuals' decisions to participate in biorepositories. The best practices framework developed from this study presents actionable strategies researchers can adopt to build trustworthiness and increase diversity in colorectal cancer biospecimen research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.