Evaluating representation of racially and ethnically minoritized populations in perinatal research: a single-site comparison of study enrollment and hospital population

Perinatal research faces persistent challenges to inclusive recruitment due to time-limited eligibility, caregiving demands, and postpartum recovery, with additional barriers disproportionately affecting racially and ethnically minoritized populations. Despite recognition of these challenges, limited real-world evidence exists on whether commonly used recruitment approaches yield study populations that reflect the diversity of the clinical populations they serve. To address this gap, we examined the demographic diversity of participants enrolled in three perinatal studies using differing recruitment strategies and compared each study population to the overall birthing population of a single women’s specialty hospital. We compared the hospital’s birthing population to the participant demographics of three observational studies conducted concurrently (2021–2023) with differing recruitment strategies. Study A, which consisted of a 30-minute online survey, used indirect outreach without compensation; study B, which consisted of a 30-minute online survey, used direct, remote outreach with $15 compensation; and study C, which involved a blood draw and a 30-minute visit, combined indirect and in-person clinic-based recruitment, offered Spanish-language support, and provided $50 compensation. One-sample tests of proportions were used to compare the demographics (race, ethnicity, age) of each study to that of the hospital’s birthing population ( n = 15,174). Compared to hospital demographics, Study A enrolled 84.1% White, 11.5% Black, and 5.1% Hispanic participants ( p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Study B enrolled 68.9% White, 28.3% Black, and 4.0% Hispanic participants ( p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Study C enrolled 50.3% White ( p = 0.327), 40.2% Black ( p < 0.001), and 9.5% Hispanic participants ( p = 0.082). Recruitment strategies that prioritize accessibility, such as in-person outreach, language support, and greater compensation, were associated with improved representation of racially and ethnically minoritized populations in perinatal research and enhance the relevance of findings to those disproportionately affected by adverse maternal outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Public Health
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-026-29415-5
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Evaluating representation of racially and ethnically minoritized populations in perinatal research: a single-site comparison of study enrollment and hospital population

Ashley R. Edwards, Briasha Jones, Joelle M. Williams, Hallie A. Rivet et al.
BMC Public Health
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Evaluating representation of racially and ethnically minoritized populations in perinatal research: a single-site comparison of study enrollment and hospital population

Ashley R. Edwards, Briasha Jones, Joelle M. Williams, Hallie A. Rivet, De'Lacy Lewis, J. Hunter Collins, Amelia C. Moore, Bryn C. Daneshfar, Elizabeth F. Sutton, Donna Russell, Andrew G. Chapple
article en

Abstract

Perinatal research faces persistent challenges to inclusive recruitment due to time-limited eligibility, caregiving demands, and postpartum recovery, with additional barriers disproportionately affecting racially and ethnically minoritized populations. Despite recognition of these challenges, limited real-world evidence exists on whether commonly used recruitment approaches yield study populations that reflect the diversity of the clinical populations they serve. To address this gap, we examined the demographic diversity of participants enrolled in three perinatal studies using differing recruitment strategies and compared each study population to the overall birthing population of a single women’s specialty hospital. We compared the hospital’s birthing population to the participant demographics of three observational studies conducted concurrently (2021–2023) with differing recruitment strategies. Study A, which consisted of a 30-minute online survey, used indirect outreach without compensation; study B, which consisted of a 30-minute online survey, used direct, remote outreach with $15 compensation; and study C, which involved a blood draw and a 30-minute visit, combined indirect and in-person clinic-based recruitment, offered Spanish-language support, and provided $50 compensation. One-sample tests of proportions were used to compare the demographics (race, ethnicity, age) of each study to that of the hospital’s birthing population ( n = 15,174). Compared to hospital demographics, Study A enrolled 84.1% White, 11.5% Black, and 5.1% Hispanic participants ( p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Study B enrolled 68.9% White, 28.3% Black, and 4.0% Hispanic participants ( p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Study C enrolled 50.3% White ( p = 0.327), 40.2% Black ( p < 0.001), and 9.5% Hispanic participants ( p = 0.082). Recruitment strategies that prioritize accessibility, such as in-person outreach, language support, and greater compensation, were associated with improved representation of racially and ethnically minoritized populations in perinatal research and enhance the relevance of findings to those disproportionately affected by adverse maternal outcomes.

BMC Public Health
University Prep (US), Woman's Hospital (US), Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.