↓ Skip to main content

Recruiting intergenerational African American males for biomedical research Studies: a major research challenge.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the National Medical Association, June 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Recruiting intergenerational African American males for biomedical research Studies: a major research challenge.
Published in
Journal of the National Medical Association, June 2011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Byrd GS, Edwards CL, Kelkar VA, Phillips RG, Byrd JR, Pim-Pong DS, Starks TD, Taylor AL, Mckinley RE, Li YJ, Pericak-Vance M

Abstract

The health and well-being of all individuals, independent of race, ethnicity, or gender, is a significant public health concern. Despite many improvements in the status of minority health, African American males continue to have the highest age-adjusted mortality rate of any race-sex group in the United States. Such disparities are accounted for by deaths from a number of diseases such as diabetes, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), cancer, and cardiovascular disease, as well as by many historical and present social and cultural constructs that present as obstacles to better health outcomes. Distrust of the medical community, inadequate education, low socioeconomic status, social deprivation, and underutilized primary health care services all contribute to disproportionate health and health care outcomes among African Americans compared to their Caucasian counterparts. Results of clinical research on diseases that disproportionately affect African American males are often limited in their reliability due to common sampling errors existing in the majority of biomedical research studies and clinical trials. There are many reasons for underrepresentation of African American males in clinical trials, including their common recollection and interpretation of relevant historical of biomedical events where minorities were abused or exposed to racial discrimination or racist provocation. In addition, African American males continue to be less educated and more disenfranchised from the majority in society than Caucasian males and females and their African American female counterparts. As such, understanding their perceptions, even in early developmental years, about health and obstacles to involvement in research is important. In an effort to understand perspectives about their level of participation, motivation for participation, impact of education, and engagement in research, this study was designed to explore factors that impact their willingness to participate. Our research suggests that: (1) African American males across all ages are willing to participate in several types of research studies, even those that require human samples; (2) their level of participation is significantly influenced by education level; and (3) their decision to participate in research studies is motivated by civic duty, monetary compensation, and whether they or a relative has had the disease of interest. However, African American males, across all age groups, continue to report a lack of trust as a primary reason for their unwillingness to participate in biomedical research. There is an ongoing need to continue to seek advice, improve communication, and design research studies that garner trust and improve participation among African American males as a targeted underrepresented population. Such communication and dialogues should occur at all age levels of research development to assess. current attitudes and behaviors of African American males around participation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 103 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 23%
Student > Master 19 18%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 8%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Psychology 13 12%
Social Sciences 12 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 22 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2011.
All research outputs
#3,061,401
of 4,507,509 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the National Medical Association
#275
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,688
of 62,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the National Medical Association
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 62,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.