A Feasibility Study of the Alliance for Representative Clinical Trials (ARC)

Building Clinical Research Capacity in Community-Based Settings

Bibliographic Data

ID19578677
AuthorsSalvatore Alesci (National Quality Forum), Jeanne M Regnante (0000-0001-8543-4091, Tigerlily Foundation, corresponding author), Kristin Bodiford (0000-0003-2753-8663, Dominican University, corresponding author), Shantia M E Horsford (National Quality Forum), Makella Coudray (0000-0002-5906-3220, University of Central Florida), Makella S Coudray (National Minority Quality Forum, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.), Tracy A Battaglia (0000-0001-8475-1212, Yale Cancer Center), Nancy J Di Dia (Western Connecticut State University), Angelo D Moore (North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University), Terri Smith Moore (American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, Arlington, Virginia, USA.), Terri Moore (American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy), Christina Edwards (0009-0008-2722-6479, National Quality Forum), Gary Puckrein (National Quality Forum)
Year2026
Volume10
Pages24731242261455193-24731242261455193
Publication date2026-01-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Equity (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2473-1242 • E-ISSN: 2473-1242
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/24731242261455193
PMID42534561
OpenAlexW7163422964
LanguageEN
References cited21

Introduction: Most patients receive care in community settings. However, few community clinicians serve as clinical trial investigators. This limits how many underrepresented patients can take part. The National Minority Quality Forum (NMQF) created the Alliance for Representative Clinical Trials (ARC) to support community clinicians in building research capacity while delivering patient care. Methods: NMQF conducted an early-stage feasibility study to understand the conditions required for equitable patient participation in clinical research. This study examined three areas: recruiting community clinicians, completing foundational research training, and assessing site readiness to offer trials. It also explored the social and structural factors that affect readiness and capacity for equitable research participation. Results: Ten community clinicians participated in the study, completing training (100%) and site assessments (90%). Eight out of ten (80%) were satisfied with the program and would recommend it. Six out of ten (60%) felt ready to lead a trial. Key barriers included limited staff, infrastructure, and time. Facilitators included trusted recruitment networks and flexible self-paced training. Discussion: The ARC showed promise in involving community clinicians in clinical research. These findings highlight the need for broader adoption, including mentorship, infrastructure investment, and financial incentives. They also inform future implementation pathways and align with national efforts to make clinical research more accessible and equitable in community care settings

Alliance · Capacity building · Clinical research · Clinical trial · Community practice · Government (linguistics) · Patient participation · Quality (philosophy) · Research design · Ethics in Clinical Research · Health Policy Implementation Science · Mental Health and Patient Involvement

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access