“Conditioning Federal Awards for Biomedical Research on Equitable Representation in the Enrollment of Research Participants: Perspectives of Biomedical Researchers” by Elmi, Ahmed Abdullahi. 

What was your dissertation research challenge? 

The shift from a one-size-fits-all approach to individualized care through precision medicine, including precision oncology, holds transformative potential. However, its benefits will continue to remain out of reach for millions—particularly those in communities facing persistent health disparities—without equitable representation in biomedical research. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded that underrepresentation in research deprives many of the full benefits of modern medicine and worsens existing disparities. Lack of diversity in clinical trials and genomic studies undermines the generalizability of findings, limits scientific advancement, and ultimately perpetuates inequities in care and health outcomes. 
 

What was your inspiration for your work? 

With over two decades in public health and clinical research, I have dedicated my career to ensuring that medicine serve all people—regardless of race, ethnicity, immigration status, or socioeconomic background. Yet, despite the progress made within my institutions, the wrongful exclusion and tokenistic inclusion of certain populations in biomedical research persist. This ongoing inequity is not only a scientific failure but a moral one. 

That is why I chose this subject as the focus of my doctoral work. Federal dollars drive biomedical research. Conditioning federal funding on the equitable inclusion of diverse research participants is essential to realizing the promise of precision medicine. It is how we ensure that scientific innovation does not leave the most vulnerable behind. I chose this subject because I believe equity in research is not optional—it is the foundation of ethical, effective, and just healthcare. 

What was the outcome and impact of your work? 

The qualitative and quantitative (1326 participants) findings offered deep insights into the perspectives of biomedical researchers regarding the conditioning of federal funds on equitable representation of research participants. Comparing and contrasting the results of both methods and identifying areas of concordance and discordance offered an explanatory pathway resulting in the development of the TRACE Framework, offering a pathway to developing a law that would address inequities in biomedical research participation, while also addressing the needs of biomedical researchers.The TRACE framework is pertinent for explaining the perspectives of biomedical researchers regarding conditioning federal awards on equitable representation of research participants. It serves as an informative guide for developing new congressional legislation or amending existing legislation. Additionally, it is a guide for federal funding agencies in developing policies to implement congressional legislation. Researchers will also gain insights into what their peers believe should be considered when developing policy or legislation. 
 

What’s next for you? 

I plan to advance my research in several key ways. First, I intend to publish a peer-reviewed article based on the mixed-methods study I conducted. Beyond publication, I plan to adapt my dissertation into a book that weaves together research findings with personal narratives from patients, advocates, and practitioners who experience the effects of exclusion and underrepresentation in biomedical research. My goal is to amplify these voices, bridge research and lived experience, and spark policy conversations that lead to meaningful change. I believe this work can influence both national legislation and institutional practices, ensuring that biomedical research truly serves all people.