How do you recruit diverse and under-represented patients for clinical trials?
By Bryan Manning, Founder · Updated August 2026
Direct answer: Go where patients actually are instead of waiting for them to find you, make the first human contact fast and respectful, and remove the practical barriers (travel, scheduling, records, trust) that decide whether interest becomes enrollment. Across our programs, 32% of enrolled patients come from under-represented populations, and we didn’t get there with a side initiative. We got there because social-first outreach plus human follow-through reaches people the traditional referral system structurally misses.
Why trials skew unrepresentative by default
The default recruitment engine (academic sites, physician referral, patients who search for trials) samples from the most connected end of the healthcare system: people with specialists, time, transportation, and a history of being treated well by medical institutions. Every one of those filters skews the sample. FDA guidance now expects diversity action plans for good reason, but a plan on paper doesn’t change who the funnel reaches. The funnel has to change.
What actually moves the number
Advertise where people are, not where researchers look
Social platforms reach communities that trial listings and academic referral networks never touch. Precise geographic and interest targeting means outreach actually lands in the communities a study needs, in language that reflects them. Representation starts as a media-buying decision.
Make the first contact fast and human
For someone with a fragile window of availability, a callback that takes four days is a no. Our average from form submission to first call is 87 seconds, and we connect with 54% of patients across all therapeutic areas. Speed reads as respect, and respect is the currency that under-served communities have the least reason to extend on credit.
Remove the practical barriers, one patient at a time
Travel support, evening and weekend screening calls, help retrieving records from fragmented care histories, and a single named person to call with questions. Each barrier looks small; stacked, they’re the reason “interested” never becomes “enrolled” for patients without slack in their lives.
Earn trust; don’t assume it
Communities with historical reasons to distrust medical research notice who shows up, how they talk, and what happens to people who say yes. Story-first creative featuring real experiences, plain-language answers about safety and consent, and screeners who listen before they read scripts. Trust is built one respectful interaction at a time, at scale.
The honest part
Site geography can cap everything. If a protocol’s sites are all attached to academic centers in wealthy zip codes, no amount of outreach fixes the drive time. We’ve watched qualified, motivated patients fall out of studies over distance. If representation matters to your program, it has to be in the site plan, not just the ad plan.
Frequently asked questions
Does diverse recruitment cost more?
Reaching beyond the default population takes deliberate media and heavier logistics support, but the biggest costs of unrepresentative enrollment arrive later: regulatory questions, label limitations, and science that generalizes worse. Prevention is the cheap option.
Is this just about race and ethnicity?
No. Age, sex, geography, income, language, and comorbidity burden all shape who ends up in trials. The same mechanics (reach, speed, barrier removal, trust) move all of them.
What should we ask a vendor about diversity?
Ask for their enrolled-population breakdown on past programs, not their intentions. Ours is 32% under-represented across programs. If a vendor can’t produce a number, they haven’t been measuring, and what isn’t measured doesn’t happen.
Enrollment on the line?
Most firms recruit patients. We deliver enrollments. We take ownership of the whole path, from first click to site visit, and we only get paid when patients enroll.