ArticleHGG advances2026
Underrepresented voices in a Colorado Biobank: Perspectives from focus groups on motivations, return of results, and data sharing.
Article in HGG advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most participants in large cohorts, such as biobanks, are of European descent. This lack of representation has been an ongoing challenge in genomic research. Understanding the perspectives on genomics research and participation in biobanks of historically underrepresented populations could provide insight into ways to better engage with these groups. We conducted a series of virtual and in-person focus groups with individuals who self-identified as American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN), African American/Black (AA/B), or Hispanic/Latino (H/L) and who were enrolled in the Colorado Center for Personalized Medicine (CCPM) biobank. The focus group discussions were centered on participant experiences, including but not limited to their motivations, return of results, and data sharing. There was a total of 23 participants across the six focus groups. The majority of participants identified as AI/AN (60.9%), followed by H/L (39.1%), and AA/B (21.7%); many participants identified with multiple race/ethnicities. The motivations for participating in the biobank included the potential to advance science and health, the potential for return of results, to learn more about one's ancestry, and a few indicated that they were interested in helping the biobank be more representative of all populations. Notably, many expressed positive feedback of the focus groups and felt that their views were valued, illustrating the importance of community-centered work. Our findings can be used to guide recruitment and engagement of biobank participants, especially from diverse backgrounds, contributing to enhanced partnerships advancing knowledge and healthcare.
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.