Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKatz, Ralph Ven_US
dc.contributor.authorJean-Charles, Germainen_US
dc.contributor.authorGreen, B Leeen_US
dc.contributor.authorKressin, Nancy Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorClaudio, Cristinaen_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, MinQien_US
dc.contributor.authorRussell, Stefanie Len_US
dc.contributor.authorOutlaw, Jasonen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-01-09T20:53:56Z
dc.date.available2012-01-09T20:53:56Z
dc.date.copyright2009en_US
dc.date.issued2009-12-16en_US
dc.identifier.citationKatz, Ralph V, Germain Jean-Charles, B Lee Green, Nancy R Kressin, Cristina Claudio, MinQi Wang, Stefanie L Russell, Jason Outlaw. "Identifying the Tuskegee Syphilis Study: implications of results from recall and recognition questions" BMC Public Health 9:468. (2009)en_US
dc.identifier.issn1471-2458en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2144/2906
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND. This analysis assessed whether Blacks, Whites and Puerto-Rican (PR) Hispanics differed in their ability to identify the Tuskegee Syphilis Study (TSS) via open-ended questions following lead-in recognition and recall questions. METHODS. The Tuskegee Legacy Project (TLP) Questionnaire was administered via a Random-Digit Dial (RDD) telephone survey to a stratified random sample of Black, White and PR Hispanic adults in three U.S. cities. RESULTS. The TLP Questionnaire was administered to 1,162 adults (356 African-Americans, 313 PR Hispanics, and 493 non-Hispanic Whites) in San Juan, PR, Baltimore, MD and New York City, NY. Recall question data revealed: 1) that 89% or more of Blacks, Whites, and PR Hispanics were not able to name or definitely identify the Tuskegee Syphilis Study by giving study attributes; and, 2) that Blacks were the most likely to provide an open-ended answer that identified the Tuskegee Syphilis Study as compared to Whites and PR Hispanics (11.5% vs 6.3% vs 2.9%, respectively) (p ≤ 0.002). Even when probed by a recognition question, only a minority of each racial/ethnic group (37.1%, 26.9%, and 8.6%, for Blacks, Whites and PR Hispanics, respectively) was able to clearly identify the TSS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS. The two major implications of these findings for health disparity researchers are 1) that it is unlikely that detailed knowledge of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study has any current widespread influence on the willingness of minorities to participate in biomedical research, and 2) that caution should be applied before assuming that what community leaders 'know and are aware of' is equally 'well known' within their community constituencies.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (U54 DE 14257, T32 DE DE007255)en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen_US
dc.rightsCopyright 2009 Katz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0en_US
dc.titleIdentifying the Tuskegee Syphilis Study: Implications of Results from Recall and Recognition Questionsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1471-2458-9-468en_US
dc.identifier.pubmedid20015361en_US
dc.identifier.pmcid2801681en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Copyright 2009 Katz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright 2009 Katz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.