Making sense of race is a difficult challenge for biomedicine. Should medicine focus on shared humanity or recognize the salience of racial and ethnic divisions? While physicians and patients continue to hope for a future free of racial animus, the unfortunate reality is that race continues to adversely affect the health and well-being of millions of individuals. The effect of race must therefore be measured and explicated. The quality of data on racial inequities has increased exponentially in recent decades, and a vast literature exists of primary reports, books, committee reviews, and recommendations from government panels. Yet, with all this documenting and cataloguing, is science meeting its obligation to make a socially useful contribution?
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Cooper RS, Nadkarni GN, Ogedegbe G. Race, Ancestry, and Reporting in Medical Journals. JAMA. 2018;320(15):1531–1532. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.10960
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: