Researcher Resources.Complex problems often require complex solutions. A universal approach for successful recruitment may not exist. However, research on recruitment and inclusion science has identified themes and strategies that may help.
|
Historical events and a lack of diversity in the health science workforce have arguably contributed to the limited effectiveness of often-used recruitment methods. Since many traditional methods were not developed for use in diverse groups, they understandably may not be effective for such use. Even more broadly speaking, traditional research frameworks largely rest on ethnocentric underlying assumptions; as such, the word research elicits an aversive response from some cultural groups. Therefore, culturally-responsive solutions may require a conceptual divergence from traditional approaches.
|
Ethically, as noted by Smith (2012) there are several questions researchers must answer:
|
Build TrustAbuses of power by research communities against vulnerable populations have resulted in a general mistrust across many cultural groups, albeit to different degrees. Potential Hispanic/Latino volunteers may have concerns about limited confidentiality of financial or citizenship information that need to be assuaged and limits to confidentiality explicitly outlined. While ethnic matching and a sense of homophily between recruiters and potential volunteers may help build trust, working closely with community leaders, stakeholders, and organizations can help close gaps in trust.
|
Improve Communication
Limited health/research literacy and lack of access to information have been identified as significant barriers in research participation for Hispanic/Latino communities. This highlights the need for improved communication, both in terms of English vs Spanish as well as medical/scientific vs lay language. Access to Spanish-speaking staff and/or materials may help in one regard, but efforts to facilitate the latter are needed. Our team incorporates community-based approaches to translate scientific jargon into community-relevant language. Such strategies can also identify the best avenues for communicating information (e.g., print vs in-person vs video) that can be used in outreach and engagement efforts.
|
Develop Cultural Competency
Strong trust and effective communication are augmented by cultural competency. Given the limited diversity in health science fields, cross-cultural encounters are inevitable and can be enhanced by a sense of cultural humility. Reciprocal respect between research teams and volunteers is an ethical obligation that extends into recruitment etiquette. Culturally-responsive approaches may require personalized/flexible research protocols. Increased cultural competency at the individual or research team levels as well as at the institutional level can help reduce some of the biases observed in recruitment and research disparities. The integration of diverse voices representative of the communities we serve into the research infrastructure (e.g., recruitment & research teams, IRB panels) is vital for equitable science.
|
|
|
|
Building trust, improving communication, and developing cultural competency are vital steps for inclusion. Including diverse voices from the community at each of these steps is vital for equity.
Track Progress
A noted barrier that has limited recruitment and inclusion science is that many research programs do not consistently document and/or report their recruitment efforts (successes & failures). For this reason, much of what we know may be impacted by a bias in reporting. Therefore, we encourage research teams to document their recruitment efforts and track their progress. For instance, community organization outreach can be tracked with a process log form. A recruitment success factor (RSF) can be calculated as a non-zero ratio of participants yielded to contact efforts made; the RSF can then be used for measuring progress:
Description of recruitment methods and sources are recommended for standard reporting: e.g.,
Including additional details of the recruitment process as well as their relative success may help others in the scientific community identify potential strategies.
Efforts to share resources on outreach, recruitment, and engagement are underway. Currently, the NIA ADORE website functions as a repository of resources. The University of California San Francisco (UCSF) also has a hub of tutorials and other resources for diverse recruitment.
- RSF = (participants yielded + 1)/(contact efforts made + 1)
Description of recruitment methods and sources are recommended for standard reporting: e.g.,
- CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)
- STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)
- STAndards for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD)
Including additional details of the recruitment process as well as their relative success may help others in the scientific community identify potential strategies.
Efforts to share resources on outreach, recruitment, and engagement are underway. Currently, the NIA ADORE website functions as a repository of resources. The University of California San Francisco (UCSF) also has a hub of tutorials and other resources for diverse recruitment.
Pilot Grants:
|
CYCLE OPEN:
ECHAR will fund 2-3 applications for pilot grants ($25,000) relevant to the Network's overarching aims. For more information, check out the Request for Applications. Complete applications can be submitted via the application portal. Applications are due July 1, 2022 by 11:59pm Eastern. We expect to make funding decisions by October 1, 2022. |
Pilot Grants:
Prior Awardees
Prior Awardees
2020
Luz Garcini, PhD MPH (Co-Investigator) Lisa Kilpela, PhD (Co-Investigator) University of Texas Health - San Antonio San Antonio, Texas Project Title: Proyecto Voces (Voices): Building Infrastructure, Identifying Barriers and Determining Facilitators for Recruitment of Underserved Latinxs to Participation in Aging Studies |