Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

Under-representation of minority ethnic groups in research — call for action

Sabi Redwood and Paramjit S Gill
British Journal of General Practice 2013; 63 (612): 342-343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp13X668456
Sabi Redwood
Roles: Research Fellow in Medical Sociology
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paramjit S Gill
Roles: GP, Reader in Primary Care Research
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

THE IMPLICATIONS OF SUPER-DIVERSITY FOR HEALTH AND RESEARCH

People have been coming to the UK since the beginning of recorded time.1 The latest Census shows that England and Wales have become more ethnically diverse with the majority of individuals still identifying themselves as white British (80.6%).2

Over the past two decades, as a result of economic and political changes, migration patterns into the UK have shifted from postcolonial migration particularly referring to relatively discreet communities from the Indian sub-continent and West Indies settling in the UK, to a new type of migration with many different people arriving from many different places. This shift in pattern has resulted in a new kind of diversity which Vertovec3 has coined ‘super-diversity’ characterised by overlapping variables including country of origin (ethnicity, language, religious tradition, regional and/or local identities), migration experience (influenced by sex, age, education, specific social networks, economic factors), and legal status (encompassing a variety of entitlements and restrictions). Thus ethnic and cultural diversity is becoming more complex. While diversity has many benefits for the economy, science, and culture, it also presents health services and research with the challenges of meeting the needs of a population that is super-diverse in terms of their health profiles and behaviour.4

THE NEED FOR ADDRESSING THE UNDER-REPRESENTATION OF MINORITY GROUPS

It has long been recognised that despite an often greater burden of disease,4 people from minority ethnic groups are under-represented in clinical and health research.5 This often inadvertent exclusion has serious implications for medical science by limiting validity and generalisability6 and for social justice by affecting the allocation of resources for services and research. Research involving minority ethnic groups is also relevant to the majority ‘white’ population, as it increases understanding of the aetiology and management of long-term conditions;7 through increasing awareness of diversity and its implication for policy and practice, by improving access to and dialogue with specific communities, and highlighting the need for holistic approaches to managing illness.4

Reasons for exclusion of minority ethnic groups are complex due to subject, doctor and/or researcher, and societal factors, and it is not clear what the range of contributory factors are, what the main reasons are, and whether the real issue is one of ’planned exclusion’, ‘inadvertent exclusion’, ‘non-participation,’ or a mixture of these. Indeed recent studies8,9 have highlighted that minority ethnic groups are willing to participate in research if the study has direct relevance to them and their community and if they are approached with sensitivity and given clear explanations of what participation involves. Furthermore, there is evidence from US-based research10 that suggests the reason for non-participation is less a function of negative attitudes or high levels of distrust, but rather a lack of commitment to ensuring good access to health research. Stereotypical and negative attitudes of researchers have the potential to shape decisions to recruit members of minority ethnic groups if they believe that those with poor English language skills may also lack, for instance, adequate housing or transport, and therefore are more likely to have difficulty in keeping appointments or complying with the study protocol.11 Such attitudes will clearly limit minority ethnic representation in research. However, guidance is available to increase non-English speaker’s participation.12

TO MANDATE OR NOT TO MANDATE?

The aim of health research is to determine the best strategies for preventing and treating disease and to inform health policy. To make sure that health policies serve a diverse population, it is important that all ethnic and cultural groups participate in health research. Indeed there is now a requirement for all patients to be given the opportunity to participate in research for the health and wellbeing of the population.13 Yet how this is to be achieved remains unclear.

In the US, legislation directed the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which funds biomedical and health research, to ensure the inclusion of women and minority ethnic groups in their research.14 Since 1994 researchers are explicitly required to replicate the ethnic composition of the population they seek to study in their sample. The NIH also stipulated that phase III clinical trials must include subgroup analyses to assess sex and ethnic differences in treatment efficacy. It recommended that these analyses should be conducted in all clinical studies, even in cases where small sample size limits the statistical power, and despite the danger of negative consequences of a study finding a difference related to ethnicity when in reality there was none. This legislation has led to some improvements in trial participation, particularly in NIH rather than industry-funded research.15 For the increasingly super-diverse UK, this raises the question if regulation mandating inclusion is also a possible solution.

The UK along with other European countries, are increasingly emphasising the benefits of making research subject populations more inclusive, but without adopting any mandatory regulations for such inclusion. The Research Governance Framework16 requires researchers ‘whenever relevant’ to take account of ‘age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, race, culture, and religion in its design, undertaking, and reporting’. However, adherence to this principle is not monitored and it is difficult to show how it has affected the recruitment of minority ethnic groups into clinical research. Alongside the Research Governance Framework, guidance on the composition of research ethics committees also emphasises the need to reflect the diversity of the population and to encourage applications for membership from groups which are under-represented, but this is also not enforced.17 We know that engagement with communities and more personalised approaches are necessary to increase the recruitment and participation of patients from all communities, including minority ethnic communities.8,18 However, these will be more resource intensive and will require funding bodies to cover associated costs. Yet to increase the evidence base for managing the patients we see in general practice, policy makers, research funders, professionals, and the public need to work together to include everyone in research.

Notes

Provenance

Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.

Funding

Sabi Redwood is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) through the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for Birmingham and Black Country (CLAHRC-BBC) programme.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2013

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Commission for Racial Equality
    (1996) Roots of the future. Ethnic diversity in the making of Britain (CRE: Belmont Press).
  2. 2.↵
    1. Office For National Statistics
    (2011) Ethnicity and national identity in England and Wales 2011 (ONS, Newport) www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-england-and-wales/rpt-ethnicity.html (accessed 24 May 2013).
  3. 3.↵
    1. Vertovec S
    (2007) Super-diversity and its implications. Ethn Racial Stud 30(6):1024–1054.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Raftery J,
    2. Stevens A,
    3. Mant J
    1. Gill PS,
    2. Kai J,
    3. Bhopal RS,
    4. Wild S
    (2007) in Health care needs assessment. The epidemiologically based needs assessment reviews, Health care needs assessment: black and minority ethnic groups, eds Raftery J, Stevens A, Mant J (Radcliffe Publishing Ltd, Abingdon) Third Series, pp 227–399.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Hussain-Gambles M,
    2. Atkin K,
    3. Leese B
    (2006) South Asian participation in clinical trials: the views of lay people and health professionals. Health Policy 77(2):149–165.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Oakley A,
    2. Wiggins M,
    3. Turner H,
    4. et al.
    (2003) Including culturally diverse samples in health research: a case study of an urban trial of social support. Ethn Health 8(1):29–39.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Taylor AL,
    2. Ziesche S,
    3. Yancy C,
    4. et al.
    (2004) Combination of isosorbide dinitrate and hydralazine in blacks with heart failure. N Engl J Med 351(20):2049–2057.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Gill PS,
    2. Plumridge G,
    3. Khunti K,
    4. Greenfield S
    (2012) Under-representation of minority ethnic groups in cardiovascular research: a semi-structured interview study. Fam Pract 30(2):233–241.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Ejiogu N,
    2. Norbeck JH,
    3. Mason MA,
    4. et al.
    (2011) Recruitment and retention strategies for minority or poor clinical research participants: lessons from the Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity across the Life Span study. Gerontologist 51(suppl 1):S33–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Wendler D,
    2. Kington R,
    3. Madans J,
    4. et al.
    (2005) Are racial and ethnic minorities less willing to participate in health research? PLoS Med 3(2):e19.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Emanuel EJ,
    2. Grady C,
    3. Crouch RA
    1. Lo B,
    2. Garan N
    (2008) in The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics, Research with ethnic and minority populations, eds Emanuel EJ, Grady C, Crouch RA (Oxford University Press, New York).
  12. 12.↵
    1. Plumridge G,
    2. Redwood S,
    3. Greenfield S,
    4. et al.
    (2012) Involving interpreters in research studies. J Health Serv Res Policy 17(3):190–192.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. The National Archives
    (2012) Health and Social Care Act 2012 (The National Archives, London) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/7/contents (accessed 24 May 2013).
  14. 14.↵
    1. National Institutes of Health
    NIH policy and guidelines on the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in clinical research--amended, October 2001, http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm (accessed 24 May 2013).
  15. 15.↵
    1. Dickerson DL,
    2. Leeman RF,
    3. Mazure CM,
    4. O’Malley SS
    (2009) The inclusion of women and minorities in smoking cessation clinical trials: a systematic review. Am J Addict 18(1):21–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Department of Health
    (2005) Research governance framework for health and social care (DoH, London), 2nd edn.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Department of Health
    (2011) Governance arrangements for research ethics committees: a harmonised edition (DoH, London).
  18. 18.↵
    1. Rooney LK,
    2. Bhopal R,
    3. Halani L,
    4. et al.
    (2011) Promoting recruitment of minority ethnic groups into research: qualitative study exploring the views of South Asian people with asthma. J Public Health (Oxf) 33(4):604–615.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 63 (612)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 63, Issue 612
July 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Under-representation of minority ethnic groups in research — call for action
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Under-representation of minority ethnic groups in research — call for action
Sabi Redwood, Paramjit S Gill
British Journal of General Practice 2013; 63 (612): 342-343. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp13X668456

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Under-representation of minority ethnic groups in research — call for action
Sabi Redwood, Paramjit S Gill
British Journal of General Practice 2013; 63 (612): 342-343. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp13X668456
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • THE IMPLICATIONS OF SUPER-DIVERSITY FOR HEALTH AND RESEARCH
    • THE NEED FOR ADDRESSING THE UNDER-REPRESENTATION OF MINORITY GROUPS
    • TO MANDATE OR NOT TO MANDATE?
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Continuity of GP care: using personal lists in general practice
  • Creating space for gut feelings in the diagnosis of cancer in primary care
  • GP workforce crisis: what can we do now?
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242