Marijuana Use and Its Association with Participation, Navigation, and Enrollment in Health Research among African Americans

Pragmatic trial of a Study Navigator Model (NAU) vs. Ambassador Model (N+) to increase enrollment to health research among community members who use illicit drugs

“…The findings suggest that treating people as people first and not disqualifying them from participation for non-medical reasons will increase the diversity of research participant populations. As noted earlier by members of this team (Webb et al, 2015), drug users are eager to participate in health research. Importantly, their participation meets the ethical requirement for justice demanded by the Belmont Report (The National Commission, 1979; Striley, 2011).…”

“…Recent research indicates that minority group members are overwhelmingly interested in and willing to participate in all types of health and medical research, though most have not been given the opportunity (Cottler et al, 2013; Hartz et al, 2011). In another report from this team, marijuana users were found to be as willing to participate in health research as non-users (Webb et al, 2015). Culturally sensitive advocates, trained to help potential research participants overcome barriers to participation, are considered to be the most important factor in the enrollment and retention process (Simmons et al, 2008; Striley et al, 2008).…”

Building capacity for collaborative research on opioid and other substance use disorders through the Clinical and Translational Science Award Program

“…Hubs could eventually evaluate their achievements in some of these areas: (1) hubs working together on both externally and internally funded initiatives, including cooperative agreements from NCATS as well as Un-Meetings on Rural Health or Regional Hub meetings; (2) the number of collaborative networks established and sustained over time; (3) the number of investigators, research coordinators, and others trained to conduct opioid research through the Translational Workforce Development programs; (4) specific models of care at each CTSA hub; (5) investigators trained in SUDs through K and T programs that have a NIDA T32 and how integrated the T32 is at each hub; (6) the mentoring mosaics that were established include an investigator from another hub; (7) increased pilot studies funded by hubs that are relevant to SUDs, in addition to opioids, and their risk factors; (8) the number of educational certificates launched that are relevant to OUD; (9) the number of grants that are submitted as well as funded that are pertinent to OUD and other SUDs; (10) community involvement regarding solutions related to OD; (11) the number of town hall meetings that involve discussions about substance use and its harm, and (12) an increase in the percentage of people with substance use or SUDs who are both recruited into and retained in health research. Metrics such as these as well as other morbidity and mortality statistics could be evaluated and tracked [35,36]. Moreover, with time, surveillance could note how the institutional culture was transformed at each site regarding the points enumerated above, including how each of the initiatives helped to inform the other.…”

Willingness of individuals with eating disorders to participate in health research

“…However, recent findings suggest that individuals receiving outpatient treatment for anxiety and mood disorders show a willingness similar to that of controls (Morán-Sánchez, Maurandi-López, & Pérez-Cárceles, 2018). Furthermore, substance use research indicates that community members who use marijuana tend to be more willing to participate in health research as compared to community members who have never used marijuana (Webb, Striley, & Cottler, 2015). While discrepancies in findings are likely attributable to differences in type of psychiatric condition and source of study population, increased research is warranted.…”