Disparities in the recruitment of minority populations in research are well-documented. However, the degree of participation and retention of minorities following enrollment is less known, particularly in decentralized studies. Although decentralized clinical research methods may allow researchers to engage broader study populations with less participation burden, they may present different retention challenges. To evaluate racial and ethnic differences in the degree of participation after enrollment in a decentralized study, we analyzed data from a cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases following COVID-19 immunization.

We compared by race and ethnicity the following post-enrollment participation metrics: response to > 50% of follow-up surveys, donation of a blood sample for antibody testing, consent to use of bio samples for future research, and withdrawal prior to study completion.

Overall, we observed higher levels of post-enrollment study participation among non-Hispanic White (NHW) participants as compared to Black or Hispanic participants: 95% of NHW participants completed follow-up versus 87% of Black participants and 91% of Hispanic participants, 73% of NHW participants provided bio samples versus 64% Black participants and 67% Hispanic participants, and 65% of NHW participants provided consent for future research versus 62% of Black participants and 52% of Hispanic participants.

Our findings demonstrate that the degree of study participation after enrollment in this decentralized study differed by race and ethnicity, indicating that attention to diversity, equity, and inclusion is needed not only in clinical research recruitment but also throughout study administration.

Computerized-adaptive testing (CAT) may increase reliability or reduce respondent burden for assessing patient-reported outcomes compared with static short forms (SFs). We compared CAT versus SF administration of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Pediatric measures in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Participants completed 4-item CAT, 5- or 6-item CAT, and 4-item SF versions of the PROMIS Pediatric measures. We compared average T-scores, intra-class correlations (ICCs), floor and ceiling effects, and standard error of measurement (SEM) across forms, along with mean effect sizes between active versus quiescent IBD disease activity groups.

Average PROMIS T-scores across forms were <3 points (minimally important difference) of each other. All forms correlated highly with each other (ICCs ≥0.90) and had similar ceiling effects, but the CAT-5/6 had lower floor effects. The CAT-5/6 had lower SEM than the CAT-4 and SF-4, and the CAT-4 had a lower SEM than the SF-4. Mean effect sizes were similar across forms when contrasting disease activity groups.

The CAT and SF forms produced similar score results, but the CAT had better precision and lower floor effects. Researchers should consider PROMIS pediatric CAT if they anticipate that their sample will skew toward symptom extremes.

Prior to the COVID pandemic, many CTSAs employed face-to-face interactions to conduct most of their community engagement (CE) activities. During the COVID pandemic, such engagement had to be curtailed and alternatives needed to be formulated. In addition, Community Engaged Research (CEnR) teams refocused their efforts to address this public health crisis.

To obtain a general understanding of how CTSAs have conducted CE and CEnR during the COVID pandemic, we invited seven CTSA CE leaders to provide brief field reports of their activities during the pandemic. This included how their approaches to CE and CEnR were modified during the COVID-19 pandemic and key lessons learned.

We found that despite numerous challenges, all seven CTSAs CE cores were able to successfully carry out CE and CEnR. We also found that the fundamental principles of meaningful and authentic stakeholder engagement were of paramount importance during the pandemic. Through virtual approaches, all sites had considerable success in maintaining CE in during the COVID pandemic. They also leveraged existing bi-directional community partnerships to carry out meaningful and impactful research. This included both new COVID CEnR and also innovative approaches to sustain prior non-COVID research.

These findings suggest that academic-community partnerships must be fostered and sustained over the many years so that when such crises emerge, all partners can build on existing trust and mutual respect. The lessons learned and the new tools and approaches developed would be key in addressing any such future public health emergencies.