Hard to reach: easy to omit

Johnson, Mark Rd

doi:10.4104/pcrj.2011.00059

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mistrust is a commonly cited barrier to inclusion, manifesting in a number of ways: mistrust of mainstream society [ 6 ], of the scientific community or of research institutions [ 23 ], perhaps due to awareness of unethical practices on the part of the medical research community in the past [ 2 , 6 , 36 ], or a perception that academic institutions are elitist and not committed to the welfare of ethnic minority communities [ 17 ]. Alternatively, the mistrust may be directed towards the general healthcare system or be culturally generated, as for example when the medical practices of the culture of origin differ substantially to those of mainstream Western physicians [ 6 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of approaches to improve participation of culturally and linguistically diverse populations in clinical trials

Hughson

Woodward‐Kron

Parker

et al. 2016

Trials

110

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The under-representation of culturally and linguistically diverse participants in clinical trials is an ongoing concern for medical researchers and the community. The aim of this review is to examine the complex issue of recruiting culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) older people to medical research and to examine responses to these issues. The review focuses on (1) trends in the existing literature on barriers to and strategies for recruiting CALD and older people to clinical research, (2) issues with informed consent for CALD populations, and (3) the efficacy of innovative approaches, including approaches incorporating multimedia in research and consent processes. The literature indicates that predominant barriers to greater involvement of CALD patients in clinical trials are communication, including literacy and health literacy considerations; English language competence; and cultural factors in the research setting such as mistrust of consent processes, as well as considerable practical and logistical barriers, including mobility considerations. Some evidence exists that incorporating multimedia resources into the informed consent process can improve patient understanding and is preferred by patients, yet these findings are inconclusive. A multi-methodological approach, including the use of culturally and linguistically sensitive multimedia tools, may help address the issue of low inclusion of CALD groups in clinical research. Researcher education needs to be taken into account to address preconceptions about CALD resistance to research participation and to raise awareness of cultural concerns in regard to research participation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of approaches to improve participation of culturally and linguistically diverse populations in clinical trials

Hughson

Woodward‐Kron

Parker

et al. 2016

Trials

110

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hard to reach people are said to require more time, resources and money to engage with and therefore are left out of policy discourse as it is not seen as cost‐effective to attempt to engage with them (De Pascale et al, 2017; Khanal et al, 2019; Stringer et al, 2020). Alternative terms exist, including ‘left behind’, ‘disengaged’ (Mills et al, 2017), ‘marginalised’, ‘refusers’ (Flanagan and Hancock, 2010), ‘not in contact’ (Dunne et al, 2019), ‘seldom heard’ (Jones, 2018), ‘easy‐to‐ignore’ (Lightbody, 2017) and ‘easy‐to‐omit’ (Johnson, 2011). Each term brings dynamics of power, agency, visibility and representation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co‐designing the environmental land management scheme in England: The why, who and how of engaging ‘harder to reach’ stakeholders

Hurley

Lyon

Hall³

et al. 2022

People and Nature

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agriculture around the world needs to become more environmentally sustainable to limit further environmental degradation and impacts of climate change. Many governments try to achieve this through enrolling farmers in agri‐environment schemes (AES) that encourage them to undertake conservation activities. Studies show that AES can suffer from low uptake, meaning their environmental objectives remain unattained. To succeed for people and nature, policy‐makers are increasingly adopting multi‐actor approaches in the ‘co‐design’ of AES to make them more attractive and inclusive of a full range of stakeholders, including ‘harder to reach’ farmers. To address why some land managers (principally farmers) may be harder to reach in the context of co‐designing England's new Environmental Land Management (ELM) approach, we undertook a quick scoping review of the literature, conducted 23 first‐round and 24 s‐round interviews with key informants, and held a workshop with 11 practitioners. We outline why farming stakeholders may be harder to reach and how policy‐makers can adjust the engagement process to make co‐design more inclusive. Based on the results, we make recommendations that could help policy‐makers to design better, more inclusive AES that would attract greater uptake and increase their chances of success. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract

“…HTR people are said to require more time, resources, and money to engage with and therefore are left out of policy discourse as it is not seen as cost-effective to attempt to engage with them (De Pascale et al, 2017;Khanal et al, 2019;Stringer et al, 2020). Alternative terms exist, including 'left behind', 'marginalised', 'refusers' (Flanagan and Hancock, 2010), 'not in contact' (Dunne et al, 2019), 'seldom heard' (Jones, 2018), 'easy-to-ignore' (Lightbody, 2017) and 'easy-to-omit' (Johnson, 2011). Each term brings dynamics of power, agency, visibility and representation.…”

Section: 1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-designing the Environmental Land Management Scheme in England: the why, who, and how of engaging ‘harder to reach’ stakeholders

Hurley¹,

Lyon²,

Hall³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After leaving the European Union and the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), farmers and land managers in England will no longer receive payments based on how much land they have, but rather how they manage the environment. The new Environmental Land Management (ELM) scheme in England will reward farmers and land managers with public money for the provision of various public goods, including improved biodiversity, cleaner air and water, healthier soils, and natural hazard protection. Since the new scheme represents a dramatic shift away from the previous subsidy regime, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has committed to ‘co-designing’ the new policy. To this end, Defra have invited farmers and land managers across England to share their views on what the new policy should look like, running two major online consultations, outreach workshops, and a network of nationwide ‘Test and Trials’ to date. We know, however, from previous research on land manager participation with government that participation can be unequal with a set of ‘usual suspects’ dominating engagement and a substantial group of ‘harder to reach’ stakeholders being less involved. Defra wants 82,500 holdings to participate in the new ELM scheme and thus wide engagement in both design and implementation is crucial. This paper explores why some land managers (focusing on farmers) might be ‘harder to reach’ in the context of ELM, who they might be, and how Defra can improve its forms of engagement to ensure that no-one is excluded from the co-design process. We identify ten different predispositions towards ELM that harder to reach farmers might have and make six recommendations that could help Defra improve ELM co-design and delivery: (1) make engagement worthwhile, (2) offer online engagement activities whilst improving connectivity, (3) reduce bureaucracy, (4) enhance trust through skilled intermediaries, (5) pay farmers promptly, and (6) ensure transitions to the new scheme are well-managed.

show abstract

Hard to reach: easy to omit

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

A review of approaches to improve participation of culturally and linguistically diverse populations in clinical trials

A review of approaches to improve participation of culturally and linguistically diverse populations in clinical trials

Co‐designing the environmental land management scheme in England: The why, who and how of engaging ‘harder to reach’ stakeholders

Co-designing the Environmental Land Management Scheme in England: the why, who, and how of engaging ‘harder to reach’ stakeholders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About