The association of medical mistrust, clinical trial knowledge, and perceived clinical trial risk with willingness to participate in health research among historically marginalized individuals living in New York City
Isabel Inez Curro, Laura Wyatt, Victoria Foster, Yousra Yusuf, Sonia Sifuentes, Perla Chebli, Julie A. Kranick, Simona C. Kwon, Chau Trinh-Shevrin, Madison N. LeCroy

TL;DR
This study explores how medical mistrust, knowledge of clinical trials, and perceived risk affect willingness to participate in health research among diverse groups in New York City.
Contribution
The paper provides group-specific insights into how mistrust and knowledge influence research participation willingness among historically marginalized communities.
Findings
46.0% of participants were willing to participate in health research, with South Asian participants showing the highest willingness.
Medical mistrust and clinical trial knowledge had varying effects on willingness and uncertainty across different racial and ethnic groups.
Studying multiple groups reveals how factors like mistrust and knowledge influence research participation differently among marginalized communities.
Abstract
Medical mistrust, clinical trial knowledge, and clinical trial risk impact research participation, yet are rarely studied among racial and ethnic groups. Data were from a cross-sectional survey (n = 1,794). Multinomial logistic regression models examined associations of medical mistrust, clinical trial knowledge, and clinical trial risk with willingness to participate in health research (Yes, No, Unsure) among Chinese, Korean, South Asian, Haitian, North American Latiné, South American Latiné, and Southwest Asian and North African (SWANA) NYC residents with one model per group. Overall, 46.0% of participants reported willingness to participate, ranging from 35.8% (Chinese participants) to 58.7% (South Asian participants). Increased mistrust was associated with less willingness among Chinese (OR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.12) and South American Latiné (OR: 1.15, 95%CI: 1.02, 1.30)…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEthics in Clinical Research · Race, Genetics, and Society · Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
