Objective Clinical trials for systemic lupus erythematosus (“lupus”) under enroll Black individuals despite higher disease prevalence, morbidity, and mortality among Black compared to White individuals. To begin to address this disparity, we leveraged community–academic partnerships in 2 US cities (Boston and Chicago) to train popular opinion leaders (POLs) to disseminate information about clinical trials in predominantly Black communities. Methods The team of community and academic partners collaboratively developed a 5‐module curriculum about clinical trials, barriers, facilitators, and structural racism in research. We enrolled POLs in Boston and Chicago to participate virtually in the curriculum and assessed knowledge gained by comparing pre‐ and post‐test scores. We described the POLs' ability to disseminate information about clinical trials through their communities. Results We enrolled 19 POLs in Boston and 16 in Chicago; overall, 71% reported a lupus diagnosis, 94% were female, and 80% self‐identified as Black or African American. The program was adapted to virtual formats due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. POLs demonstrated significant improvement comparing pre/post scores for the conduct of clinical trials and history of racism in clinical research. Fifteen POLs (43%) reported their dissemination of information about clinical trials. Information reached 425 community members in Boston (90% virtually) and 1,887 in Chicago (95% virtually). Conclusion By leveraging community–academic partnerships, we developed and implemented a curriculum to promote familiarity with clinical trials, leading to information dissemination by POLs in predominantly Black communities that are underrepresented in lupus clinical trials. The program successfully transitioned to a virtual model during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

ObjectiveSocial determinants of health (SDoH), such as poverty, are associated with increased burden and severity of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. This study was undertaken to study the prevalence and documentation of SDoH‐related needs in electronic health records (EHRs) of individuals with these conditions.MethodsWe randomly selected individuals with ≥1 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision (ICD‐9/10) code for a rheumatic/musculoskeletal condition enrolled in a multihospital integrated care management program that coordinates care for medically and/or psychosocially complex individuals. We assessed SDoH documentation using terms for financial needs, food insecurity, housing instability, transportation, and medication access according to EHR note review and ICD‐10 SDoH billing codes (Z codes). We used multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between demographic factors (age, gender, race, ethnicity, insurance) and ≥1 (versus 0) SDoH need as the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI).ResultsAmong 558 individuals with rheumatic/musculoskeletal conditions, 249 (45%) had ≥1 SDoH need documented in EHR notes by social workers, care coordinators, nurses, and physicians. A total of 171 individuals (31%) had financial insecurity, 105 (19%) had transportation needs, 94 (17%) had food insecurity; 5% had ≥1 related Z code. In the multivariable model, the odds of having ≥1 SDoH need was 2.45 times higher (95% CI 1.17–5.11) for Black versus White individuals and significantly higher for Medicaid or Medicare beneficiaries versus commercially insured individuals.ConclusionNearly half of this sample of complex care management patients with rheumatic/musculoskeletal conditions had SDoH documented within EHR notes; financial insecurity was the most prevalent. Only 5% of patients had representative billing codes suggesting that systematic strategies to extract SDoH from notes are needed.