Addressing Racism in Preventive Services: Methods Report to Support the US Preventive Services Task Force | Guidelines | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Table 1.  Racial Categories in the USa
Racial Categories in the USa
Table 2.  Racial and Ethnic Terminology Guidance
Racial and Ethnic Terminology Guidance
Table 3.  Categories and Terms Used to Describe Different Types of Racism
Categories and Terms Used to Describe Different Types of Racism
1.
Doubeni  CA, Simon  M, Krist  AH.  Addressing systemic racism through clinical preventive service recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force.   JAMA. 2021;325(7):627-628. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.26188PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Lin  JS, Hoffman  L, Bean  SI, O’Connor  EA, Martin  AM, Iacocca  MO, Bacon  OP, Davies  MC.  Addressing Racism in Preventive Services: A Methods Project for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2021. AHRQ publication 21-05281-EF-2.
3.
Fuentes  A, Ackermann  RR, Athreya  S,  et al.  AAPA statement on race and racism.   Am J Phys Anthropol. 2019;169(3):400-402. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23882PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Hebert  PL, Sisk  JE, Howell  EA.  When does a difference become a disparity? conceptualizing racial and ethnic disparities in health.   Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(2):374-382. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.2.374PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Williams  DR.  Race and health: basic questions, emerging directions.   Ann Epidemiol. 1997;7(5):322-333. doi:10.1016/S1047-2797(97)00051-3PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Cosmides  L, Tooby  J, Kurzban  R.  Perceptions of race.   Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(4):173-179. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00057-3PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Yu  N, Chen  FC, Ota  S,  et al.  Larger genetic differences within Africans than between Africans and Eurasians.   Genetics. 2002;161(1):269-274. doi:10.1093/genetics/161.1.269PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Rosenberg  NA, Pritchard  JK, Weber  JL,  et al.  Genetic structure of human populations.   Science. 2002;298(5602):2381-2385. doi:10.1126/science.1078311PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Gannon  M. Race is a social construct, scientists argue. Scientific American [serial online]. Published February 5, 2016. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/
10.
New AMA policies recognize race as a social, not biological, construct. American Medical Association. Published November 6, 2020. Accessed June 2021. https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/new-ama-policies-recognize-race-social-not-biological-construct
11.
Trent  M, Dooley  DG, Dougé  J; Section on Adolescent Health; Council on Community Pediatrics; Committee on Adolescence.  The impact of racism on child and adolescent health.   Pediatrics. 2019;144(2):e20191765. doi:10.1542/peds.2019-1765PubMedGoogle Scholar
12.
Kahn  J.  How a drug becomes “ethnic”: law, commerce, and the production of racial categories in medicine.   Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics. 2004;4(1):1-46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
13.
Race. US Census Bureau. Accessed February 9, 2020. https://www.census.gov/topics/population/race/about.html
14.
Cruz-Flores  S, Rabinstein  A, Biller  J,  et al; American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; Council on Epidemiology and Prevention; Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research.  Racial-ethnic disparities in stroke care: the American experience: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.   Stroke. 2011;42(7):2091-2116. doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e3182213e24PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
 Racial and Ethnic Categories and Definitions for NIH Diversity Programs and for Other Reporting Purposes. National Institutes of Health; 2015.
16.
Vanidestine  T, Aparicio  EM.  How social welfare and health professionals understand “race,” racism, and whiteness: a social justice approach to grounded theory.   Soc Work Public Health. 2019;34(5):430-443. doi:10.1080/19371918.2019.1616645PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Lee  C.  “Race” and “ethnicity” in biomedical research: how do scientists construct and explain differences in health?   Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(6):1183-1190. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.12.036PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Drevdahl  D, Taylor  JY, Phillips  DA.  Race and ethnicity as variables in Nursing Research, 1952-2000.   Nurs Res. 2001;50(5):305-313. doi:10.1097/00006199-200109000-00009PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Racial and ethnic identity. American Psychological Association. Accessed January 10, 2021. https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/racial-ethnic-minorities
20.
Structural racism and health equity language guide. American Heart Association. Published May 2021. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://professional.heart.org/en/science-news/-/media/e7ac17a71ec6494784247243f29525e0.ashx
21.
Flanagin  A, Frey  T, Christiansen  SL; AMA Manual of Style Committee.  Updated guidance on the reporting of race and ethnicity in medical and science journals.   JAMA. 2021;326(7):621-627. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.13304PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
University of South Carolina Aiken Department of Diversity Initiatives. Inclusive language guide. Accessed February 6, 2020. https://www.usca.edu/diversity-initiatives/training-resources/guide-to-inclusive-language/inclusive-language-guide/file
23.
JAMA Network Editors.  AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. 11th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020.
24.
Milner  A, Jumbe  S.  Using the right words to address racial disparities in COVID-19.   Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(8):e419-e420. doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30162-6PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Bonilla-Silva  E.  Rethinking racism: toward a structural interpretation.   Am Sociol Rev. 1997;62(3):465-480. doi:10.2307/2657316Google ScholarCrossref
26.
Williams  DR, Mohammed  SA.  Racism and health I: pathways and scientific evidence.   Am Behav Sci. 2013;57(8). doi:10.1177/0002764213487340PubMedGoogle Scholar
27.
Williams  DR, Lawrence  JA, Davis  BA.  Racism and health: evidence and needed research.   Annu Rev Public Health. 2019;40:105-125. doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-043750PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Gee  GC, Ford  CL.  Structural racism and health inequities: old issues, new directions.   Du Bois Rev. 2011;8(1):115-132. doi:10.1017/S1742058X11000130PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Bailey  ZD, Krieger  N, Agénor  M, Graves  J, Linos  N, Bassett  MT.  Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions.   Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1453-1463. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-XPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Jones  CP.  Levels of racism: a theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale.   Am J Public Health. 2000;90(8):1212-1215. doi:10.2105/AJPH.90.8.1212 PubMedGoogle Scholar
31.
Howe  CJ, Dulin-Keita  A, Cole  SR,  et al; CFAR Network of Integrated Clinical Systems.  Evaluating the population impact on racial/ethnic disparities in HIV in adulthood of intervening on specific targets: a conceptual and methodological framework.   Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(2):316-325. doi:10.1093/aje/kwx247PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
La  IS, Lee  MC, Hinderer  KA,  et al.  Palliative care for the Asian American adult population: a scoping review.   Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):658-670. doi:10.1177/1049909120928063PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Hicken  MT, Kravitz-Wirtz  N, Durkee  M, Jackson  JS.  Racial inequalities in health: framing future research.   Soc Sci Med. 2018;199:11-18. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.027PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Tsai  W, Nusrath  S, Zhu  R.  Systematic review of depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms among Asian American breast cancer survivors.   BMJ Open. 2020;10(9):e037078. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037078PubMedGoogle Scholar
35.
Walton  J, Priest  N, Paradies  Y.  “It depends how you're saying it”: the conceptual complexities of everyday racism.   Int J Conf Violence. 2013;7(1):74-90.Google Scholar
36.
 Position Statement: Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism. National Association of School Psychologists; 2019.
37.
Fiske  ST, Gilbert  DT, Gardner  L,.  Handbook of Social Psychology. John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
38.
Constitution of the World Health Organization: Basic Documents, 45th ed, Supplement. World Health Organization. Published October 2006. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf
39.
Ramírez García  JI.  Integrating Latina/o ethnic determinants of health in research to promote population health and reduce health disparities.   Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2019;25(1):21-31. doi:10.1037/cdp0000265PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
40.
US Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary’s Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2020. Phase I report: recommendations for the framework and format of Healthy People 2020: Section IV: Advisory Committee findings and recommendations. HealthyPeople.gov. Published October 28, 2008. Accessed November 18, 2020. https://www.healthypeople.gov/sites/default/files/PhaseI_0.pdf
41.
Marmot  M.  Health equity: the challenge.   Aust N Z J Public Health. 2012;36(6):513-514. doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00948.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
42.
Social Determinates of Health. HealthyPeople.gov. Accessed January 21, 2021. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/social-determinants-of-health
43.
Solar  O, Irwin  A. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health: Social Determinants of Health Discussion Paper 2 (Policy and Practice). World Health Organization. Published 2010. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241500852
44.
Paradies  Y, Ben  J, Denson  N,  et al.  Racism as a determinant of health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.   PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0138511. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138511PubMedGoogle Scholar
45.
Paradies  Y, Truong  M, Priest  N.  A systematic review of the extent and measurement of healthcare provider racism.   J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(2):364-387. doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2583-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
46.
Vyas  DA, Eisenstein  LG, Jones  DS.  Hidden in plain sight—reconsidering the use of race correction in clinical algorithms.   N Engl J Med. 2020;383(9):874-882. doi:10.1056/NEJMms2004740PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
47.
Bailey  ZD, Krieger  N, Agénor  M, Graves  J, Linos  N, Bassett  MT.  Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions.   Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1453-1463. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-XPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
48.
Saha  S, Freeman  M, Toure  J, Tippens  KM, Weeks  C, Ibrahim  S.  Racial and ethnic disparities in the VA health care system: a systematic review.   J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(5):654-671. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0521-4PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
49.
Thrasher  AD, Clay  OJ, Ford  CL, Stewart  AL.  Theory-guided selection of discrimination measures for racial/ethnic health disparities research among older adults.   J Aging Health. 2012;24(6):1018-1043. doi:10.1177/0898264312440322PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
50.
Sarrazin  MS, Campbell  ME, Richardson  KK, Rosenthal  GE.  Racial segregation and disparities in health care delivery: conceptual model and empirical assessment.   Health Serv Res. 2009;44(4):1424-1444. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2009.00977.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
51.
Fenton  JJ, Weyrich  MS, Durbin  S,  et al.  Prostate-specific antigen–based screening for prostate cancer: evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.   JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914-1931. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.3712PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
52.
Henderson  JT, Vesco  KK, Senger  CA, Thomas  RG, Redmond  N.  Aspirin Use to Prevent Preeclampsia and Related Morbidity and Mortality: An Evidence Update for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis No. 205. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2021. AHRQ publication 21-05274-EF-1.
53.
Nelson  HD CA, Wagner  J, Jungbauer  R, Quiñones  A, Fu  R, Stillman  L, Kondo  K.  Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2019.
54.
Garzón-Orjuela  N, Samacá-Samacá  DF, Luque Angulo  SC,  et al.  An overview of reviews on strategies to reduce health inequalities.   Int J Equity Health. 2020;19(1):192. doi:10.1186/s12939-020-01299-wPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
55.
Yadee  J, Bangpan  M, Thavorn  K, Welch  V, Tugwell  P, Chaiyakunapruk  N.  Assessing evidence of interventions addressing inequity among migrant populations: a two-stage systematic review.   Int J Equity Health. 2019;18(1):64. doi:10.1186/s12939-019-0970-xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
56.
Chae  D, Kim  J, Kim  S, Lee  J, Park  S.  Effectiveness of cultural competence educational interventions on health professionals and patient outcomes: a systematic review.   Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2020;17(3):e12326. doi:10.1111/jjns.12326PubMedGoogle Scholar
57.
Jongen  C, McCalman  J, Bainbridge  R.  Health workforce cultural competency interventions: a systematic scoping review.   BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):232. doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3001-5PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
58.
Filmer  T, Herbig  B.  Effectiveness of interventions teaching cross-cultural competencies to health-related professionals with work experience: a systematic review.   J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2018;38(3):213-221. doi:10.1097/CEH.0000000000000212PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
59.
Oikarainen  A, Mikkonen  K, Kenny  A,  et al.  Educational interventions designed to develop nurses’ cultural competence: a systematic review.   Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;98:75-86. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.06.005PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
60.
Clifford  A, McCalman  J, Bainbridge  R, Tsey  K.  Interventions to improve cultural competency in health care for Indigenous peoples of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA: a systematic review.   Int J Qual Health Care. 2015;27(2):89-98. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzv010PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
61.
Alizadeh  S, Chavan  M.  Cultural competence dimensions and outcomes: a systematic review of the literature.   Health Soc Care Community. 2016;24(6):e117-e130. doi:10.1111/hsc.12293PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
63.
Carr  RM, Quezada  SM, Gangarosa  LM,  et al; Governing Board of the American Gastroenterological Association.  From intention to action: operationalizing AGA diversity policy to combat racism and health disparities in gastroenterology.   Gastroenterology. 2020;159(5):1637-1647. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.07.044PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
64.
Patel  MI, Lopez  AM, Blackstock  W,  et al.  Cancer disparities and health equity: a policy statement from the American Society of Clinical Oncology.   J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(29):3439-3448. doi:10.1200/JCO.20.00642PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
65.
Serchen  J, Doherty  R, Atiq  O, Hilden  D; Health and Public Policy Committee of the American College of Physicians.  A comprehensive policy framework to understand and address disparities and discrimination in health and health care: a policy paper from the American College of Physicians.   Ann Intern Med. 2021;174(4):529-532. doi:10.7326/M20-7219PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
66.
Wyatt  R, Laderman  M, Botwinick  L,  et al. Achieving health equity: a guide for health care organizations. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Published 2016. Accessed June 14, 2021. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/IHIWhitePapers/Achieving-Health-Equity.aspx
67.
Ending structural racism: UNITE. National Institutes of Health. Accessed June 14, 2021. https://www.nih.gov/ending-structural-racism/unite
68.
Alonso-Coello  P, Schünemann  HJ, Moberg  J,  et al; GRADE Working Group.  GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices, 1: introduction.   BMJ. 2016;353:i2016. doi:10.1136/bmj.i2016PubMedGoogle Scholar
69.
Welch  VA, Akl  EA, Guyatt  G,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 1: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: introduction and rationale.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:59-67. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.014PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
70.
Akl  EA, Welch  V, Pottie  K,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 2: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: equity extension of the guideline development checklist.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:68-75. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.017PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
71.
Welch  VA, Akl  EA, Pottie  K,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:76-83. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
72.
Pottie  K, Welch  V, Morton  R,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 4: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: evidence to decision process.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:84-91. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.001PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
US Preventive Services Task Force
November 8, 2021

Addressing Racism in Preventive Services: Methods Report to Support the US Preventive Services Task Force

Author Affiliations
  • 1Kaiser Permanente Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente, Portland, Oregon
  • 2Abt Associates, Cambridge, Massachusetts
JAMA. 2021;326(23):2412-2420. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.17579
Abstract

Importance  In January 2021, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued a values statement that acknowledged systemic racism and included a commitment to address racism and health equity in recommendations for clinical preventive services.

Objectives  To articulate the definitional and conceptual issues around racism and health inequity and to describe how racism and health inequities are currently addressed in preventive health.

Methods  An audit was conducted assessing (1) published literature on frameworks or policy and position statements addressing racism, (2) a subset of cancer and cardiovascular topics in USPSTF reports, (3) recent systematic reviews on interventions to reduce health inequities in preventive health or to prevent racism in health care, and (4) health care–relevant professional societies, guideline-making organizations, agencies, and funding bodies to gather information about how they are addressing racism and health equity.

Findings  Race as a social category does not have biological underpinnings but has biological consequences through racism. Racism is complex and pervasive, operates at multiple interrelated levels, and exerts negative effects on other social determinants and health and well-being through multiple pathways. In its reports, the USPSTF has addressed racial and ethnic disparities, but not racism explicitly. The systematic reviews to support the USPSTF include interventions that may mitigate health disparities through cultural tailoring of behavioral interventions, but reviews have not explicitly addressed other commonly studied interventions to increase the uptake of preventive services or foster the implementation of preventive services. Many organizations have issued recent statements and commitments around racism in health care, but few have provided substantive guidance on operational steps to address the effects of racism. Where guidance is unavailable regarding the proposed actions, it is principally because work to achieve them is in very early stages. The most directly relevant and immediately useful guidance identified is that from the GRADE working group.

Conclusions and Relevance  This methods report provides a summary of issues around racism and health inequity, including the status of how these are being addressed in preventive health.

Introduction

In 2020, following the deaths of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) established a Race and Racism work group. This work group issued a values statement for the USPSTF that directly acknowledged that systemic racism prevents many people of color from fully benefiting from their recommended clinical preventive services and also denounced racism in all forms against any group of people.1 As part of this statement, the USPSTF made commitments to address racism and health equity. In support of these commitments, this methods study was conducted to help the USPSTF understand how racism may be preventing it from achieving its prevention goals and how to evolve the USPSTF reports to more directly address racism and health inequities by race and ethnicity.

Methods
Scope of Project

Working with the USPSTF and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), 2 aims were operationalized into answerable questions given the time frame and resources allotted (Box). The main findings are presented in this article. The full report2 has additional details on the methods, findings, and limitations.

Box Section Ref ID
Box.

Guiding Aims and Questions

Aim 1: To articulate the definitional and conceptual issues around racism and health inequities
  • Question 1. What are the key terms and concepts around the discussion of racism and health inequities? How are these terms and concepts defined and applied (eg, race, racism, health inequities, social determinants of health [SDH])? How are these terms interrelated?

  • Question 2. How does racism produce health inequities? What are the mechanisms of action?

Aim 2: To describe how racism and health inequities are currently being addressed in preventive health
  • Question 3. How are racism and health inequities addressed in current USPSTF reports?

  • Question 4. What types of interventions can reduce health inequities by race in preventive health?

  • Question 5. What types of interventions directly address racism in health care?

  • Question 6. What work are other health and health care institutions/organizations doing to address racism?

Identification and Synthesis of Literature

To address Questions 1 and 2, an audit was conducted of the published literature identified through a search conducted September 2020 for articles that presented social frameworks and models or policy and position statements that addressed racism (eMethods in the Supplement).

To address Question 3, an audit was conducted of a subset of the current USPSTF reports in October 2020, focusing on cancer and cardiovascular topics because of limitations in both time and resources. For each topic, both the recommendation statement and supporting evidence documents were audited to assess if race, racism, or both were addressed in the document(s); where and how they were addressed; if health disparities were described for the risk factors, disease/condition, or morbidity/mortality from disease; if the mechanism for health disparities/inequities was described; and if there was any evidence to support differential benefits or harms by race and ethnicity.

To address Questions 4 and 5, searches through November 2020 were conducted for recent systematic reviews that would address these questions (eMethods in the Supplement). For Question 4, which addressed interventions to reduce health inequities by race in preventive health, the focus was on interventions to increase the uptake of cancer and cardiovascular-related preventive services to match the focus of Question 3. The searches aimed to identify patient-level interventions (eg, to increase the uptake of preventive services, to tailor a preventive service to improve its effectiveness) and interventions at the health system level or aimed at clinicians designed to reduce health inequities, specifically address racism, or both.

To address Question 6, an audit was conducted from November 2020 through March 2021 of health care and health care–relevant professional societies, guideline-making organizations, agencies, and funding bodies to gather information about how they are addressing race, racism, and health equity (eg, terminology, strategies, methods). This audit primarily focused on entities in the US and selected high-income countries when relevant. The websites of 95 agencies, professional medical associations, and other health care–relevant organizations were reviewed for race, racism, and health equity content. For organizations that develop guidelines, there was a search for information on the organizations’ methods for addressing racism and health inequity in their guidelines by examining their methods/procedures manuals, when available.

Findings

Aim 1. To articulate the definitional and conceptual issues around racism and health inequities

Question 1. What are the key terms and concepts around the discussion of racism and health inequities? How are these terms and concepts defined and applied (eg, race, racism, health inequities, social determinants of health [SDH])? How are these terms interrelated?

Race is a complex classification that has been socially, politically, and legally constructed over the past 5 centuries.3 Although once believed to be rooted in biology, anthropology, and genetics, race is not an accurate representation of human biological variation or of evolutionarily independent lineages.3-9 In recent years, several scientific and medical organizations have issued policy statements recognizing race as a social construct, rather than a biological one.3,10,11 Race as a social category does not have biological underpinnings. However race, through racism, has real biological consequences.12

The concept of race emerged from, and in support of, European colonialism, oppression, exploitation, and discrimination.3 Racial ideology initially sought to divide and rank people of European, Native American, and African descent by ascribing significance to observable physical differences and similarities. Currently, 5 racial categories are recognized and defined by the US Office of Management and Budget and adopted by federal agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (Table 1).15

Ethnicity refers to a collection of people who share a common ancestry, history, or culture.14 Ethnicity is a broader social category than race and encompasses a wide range of learned cultural characteristics including language, religion, traditions, diet, values, and norms as well as memories of migration or colonization.16,17 People can identify as more than 1 ethnic group (eg, Cuban American, Black Caribbean, Italian or Roman Jewish). Currently, only 2 ethnic categories are recognized and defined by the Office of Management and Budget: people of Hispanic/Latino origin (ie, a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin), and people not of Hispanic/Latino origin.13

Race and ethnicity are complex terms that are often used interchangeably with little to no definition.16-18 However, they carry different meanings and are not synonymous. Although there is no consensus on preferred terminology, consistent themes regarding how racial and ethnic groups are described are19-23:

  1. Avoid the use of Black and White as nouns (ie, Whites). Instead, use Black people or White people, or Black men and White men, etc.

  2. Err on the side of using Latino, Latina, or, if referring to a gender-neutral population, Latinx rather than Hispanic (although this was not a universal recommendation).

  3. Avoid nonparallel comparisons (eg, African American vs White).

  4. Avoid the term Caucasian to indicate White, as it is specific to people from the Caucasus region in Eurasia.

  5. Refer to the terminology suggested by American Psychological Association19 when describing Asian and Native populations (eg, Asian American, Alaska Native).

Guidance in the reviewed literature indicates that it is preferable to be specific when referring to groups of people. For example, if the meaning is to describe Black and Latinx populations, this should be specified rather than referring to these groups collectively as “diverse” populations. When referring to other than White racial and ethnic groups collectively, using terms such as people of color or racially minoritized may be preferable to terms like non-White, minority, or disadvantaged populations.19,21,24 However, there is no universally agreed-on preferred term, and the terminology in this field continues to evolve. A brief overview of guidance regarding language preferences for specific racial and ethnic categories is presented in Table 2.

Racism is an organized social system in which the dominant racial group uses its power to devalue, disempower, and differentially allocate valued resources and opportunities to a racial group or racial groups considered inferior.25,26 Racism can manifest in many ways (eg, beliefs, stereotypes, prejudices, discrimination) and at many levels (eg, institutional, interpersonal) within a society. Various categorizations have been used to conceptualize different forms of racism (Table 3).

Health disparities refer to differences in health outcomes across populations. Health disparities are not always due to inequity; however, the term is often used synonymously with health inequity to signify important differences in health outcomes or health determinants between populations (eg, by race and ethnicity) due to inequity or injustice.4 Although there are many circulating definitions of health inequity,38-41 they converge on the same concepts: (1) health equity is a fundamental human right, (2) differences in health or health determinants are avoidable or remediable (ie, due to plausibly avoidable social, economic, or other disadvantage), (3) differences in health or health determinants are among groupings defined socially, economically, demographically, or geographically, and (4) differences in health or health determinants are clinically meaningful.

Social determinants of health include race and ethnicity (and immigration status), racism (eg, discrimination, residential segregation), and the downstream consequences of racism (eg, education, financial strain, health behaviors, health care access, incarceration). Both Healthy People 2020 and the World Health Organization (WHO) similarly define SDH as conditions in which people are born, live, work, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes and risks.38,42 The uneven distribution of SDH, sometimes referred to as social inequities in health, results in health disparities. The WHO Commission on SDH has a conceptual framework that illustrates how deeply embedded, structural determinants (institutions, policies, societal values) affect health equity and well-being in a society.43

Question 2. How does racism produce health inequities? What are the mechanisms of action?

There is a large and growing body of evidence that (1) racism creates health inequities, (2) racially stigmatized populations have worse health than White counterparts, and (3) racism is built into medicine and health.26,44-46 Understanding the mechanisms by which differences in race and ethnicity and racism can affect health, and their determinants, is a prerequisite to finding solutions to achieve greater health equity. The mechanisms producing health inequities are varied, ranging from differences in disease awareness, attitudes, and beliefs (eg, mistrust, religious/cultural beliefs) to differences in access to the full continuum of care and the quality of care received. Racism specifically can affect health via several recognized pathways, not limited to (1) reduced access to employment, housing, optimal health care, and education or increased exposure to risk factors (eg, occupational or environmental risk, inequitable legal enforcement); (2) adverse cognitive, psychological, and emotional effects and processes; (3) allostatic load (ie, cumulative wear and tear on physiologic systems and organs due to adversity or stress) and neurobiological response (eg, hypothalamaic-pituitary-adrenal axis) to chronic stressors; (4) diminished participation in healthy behaviors (eg, sleep, exercise) or increased engagement in unhealthy behaviors (eg, alcohol consumption), either directly or indirectly resulting from stressors due to racism or racially targeted marketing; and (5) physical injury as a result of racially motivated violence.44,47

Several frameworks, like the aforementioned framework by the WHO Commission on SDH,43 have been described to articulate how racism produces health inequities. Other frameworks are more singularly focused on race and racism.47-50 One of these comprehensive frameworks, by Williams et al,26 articulates the multiple pathways by which racism can affect health, recognizing that racism is one of several fundamental determinants of health (emphasizing institutional and cultural racism). This framework is structurally similar to the WHO SDH framework but provides more detail specific to the effects of racism. It also emphasizes the importance of distinguishing fundamental (“basic”) causes from surface or intervening causes. This highlights that interventions aimed at changing intervening rather than fundamental causes are unlikely to produce long-term improvements in population health.

Aim 2. To describe how racism and health inequities are currently being addressed in preventive health

Question 3. How are racism and health inequities addressed in the current USPSTF reports?

An audit was conducted of 27 topics within USPSTF reports that included screening, counseling, and chemoprevention recommendations for cancer and cardiovascular topics (cardiovascular disease, diabetes, hypertensive disorders, and obesity). Nineteen of the 27 topics addressed race or ethnicity in the recommendation statement, and 25 of them mentioned race or ethnicity in the evidence review. Overall, most of the topics addressed racial and ethnic health disparities in prevalence and incidence of the disease or condition, risk factors for the disease, and morbidity or mortality from the disease, although with varying detail. Few topics addressed race or ethnicity regarding current practice or uptake in preventive services, although the evidence report for screening for prostate cancer (2018) notes that differential adherence to diagnostic follow-up may account for some of the disparities.51 Only 8 topics articulated possible mechanisms for racial and ethnic disparities; 5 of these were cancer topics, 2 were maternal topics on preeclampsia screening and preeclampsia treatment, and 1 was a pediatric topic on screening for obesity. Only 1 topic (low-dose aspirin use for preventing preeclampsia) directly mentioned the role of racism, stating in the evidence review that “systemic racial biases in health care are thought to contribute to the greater risk and worse outcomes of preeclampsia for Black women.”52

While many topics explicitly included questions on the differences or variation of outcomes by race or ethnicity, in most cases, limited reporting or sparse representation of these populations in included studies prevented any meaningful analysis. Despite the lack of available evidence by race and ethnicity, only 5 recommendation statements and 5 systematic reviews explicitly mentioned the need for more research including specific racial and ethnic groups.

There was significant variation in the language used for racial and ethnic categories in the recommendation statements and supporting evidence documents (eg, African American vs Black people, Native American vs American Indian individuals). While some of this variation may be related to the inconsistency in terminology among the primary studies referenced, the differences in terminology may not be intentional, and it is not apparent when and if the variation in terminology is purposeful.

Question 4. What types of interventions can reduce health inequities by race in preventive health?

A large and growing body of literature has examined interventions to improve care for people of color or underrepresented populations as well as to address health disparities by race and ethnicity (eTable 1 in the Supplement).53-55 The most commonly studied delivery arrangements or implementation strategies relevant to cancer and cardiovascular disease prevention included culturally targeted and tailored lifestyle and self-management interventions; community health workers and patient navigators; patient outreach; improving access to care (eg, through integration of services, or case management); development and use of care pathways; use of information and communication technology; and clinician education and training. Although the number of studies, study designs, strength of evidence, populations studied, and outcomes assessed varied across these bodies of evidence, there was evidence to suggest that each of these types of interventions can improve various outcomes (health care utilization, behavioral outcomes, clinical disease indicators [eg, hemoglobin A1c levels], screening rates). However, there is still limited evidence on evaluating if these types of interventions can reduce health disparities between populations, and there are examples illustrating the potential of these interventions to exacerbate disparities. For example, in a review of the effect of preventive health interventions in populations adversely affected by disparities, a small number of studies of interventions to increase colorectal cancer screening, such as print materials with or without telephone counseling, showed greater benefits in “non-Black” populations than in Black populations.53

Question 5. What types of interventions directly address racism in health care?

Many of the above interventions aimed at reducing health disparities by race and ethnicity, while not designed explicitly to target racism or its effects on health, address downstream effects of racism directly or indirectly. In addition, there was a body of evidence on the effect of cultural sensitivity (previously referred to as cultural competence) training in health professionals that may reduce interpersonal racism. However, few studies appear to report patient outcomes or objective assessments of cultural sensitivity of clinicians when interacting with patients.56-60

One review identified 18 cultural sensitivity frameworks, but only 13 studies reported empirical data, suggesting this field is still in the formative stage.61

Question 6. What work are other health and health care institutions/organizations doing to address racism?

In the audit of various organizations, several groups were identified that provided substantial guiding principles or policy statements on addressing racism and health equity (eTable 2 in the Supplement). In general, the organizations that have taken their efforts beyond simple statements of awareness or concern describe taking action in accordance with recognizing the importance of terminology. Additionally, these organizations are voicing the need to ensure diversity in their leadership and staff and to develop expertise in antiracism. Resources with the most potential identified recognized that making real progress in improving equity in health care requires a foundational, comprehensive approach, with accountability.

Overall, the Proposed USPSTF Actions to Address Racism in Clinical Preventive Services Recommendations1 are thorough and reflect what was observed in the audit. For example, regarding plans to “seek to partner with guideline making bodies, professional societies, policy makers, and patient advocacy organizations”:

  • The American Cancer Society identified partnerships as one of its 3 main categories of Health Equity Principles62;

  • The American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) includes a commitment to “coalition building with other organizations who are working toward incorporating anti-racism as a strategy to improve diversity and reduce disparities” within its framework63; and

  • The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recommends “partnering with local communities and legislatures to support implementation of activities and application of research findings known to improve health equity.”64

The USPSTF has also tasked itself with “routinely highlighting evidence gaps related to race and racism for each clinical preventive service” and “calling for additional research for addressing systemic racism to improve delivery of preventive services.”1 Similarly, in the American College of Physicians (ACP) policy framework, it is stated that the “ACP believes that more research and data collection related to racial and ethnic health disparities are needed to empower policymakers and stakeholders to better understand and address the problem of disparities.”64,65

The USPSTF plans to “develop, integrate, and iteratively refine a health equity framework.”1 Particularly relevant examples of frameworks from other organizations are the following:

  • Institute for Healthcare Improvement
    Achieving Health Equity: A Guide for Health Care Organizations66

  • ACP
    Policy Framework to Understand and Address Disparities and Discrimination in Health and Health Care65

  • AGA
    From Intention to Action: Operationalizing AGA Diversity Policy to Combat Racism and Health Disparities in Gastroenterology63

Similar to other organizations, the USPSTF mentions critical gaps to address. For example, methods “to identify systemic racism as a causal factor for variations in prevalence and outcomes” are in early stages of development.1 Similarly, identifying the types of studies and outcomes needed to address systemic racism is being called for now, including in efforts such as the National Institute of Health UNITE initiative,67 the ACP framework,65 and the ASCO recommendations.64

Published guidance on incorporating health equity in clinical practice guidelines and systematic reviews is still quite limited. The most comprehensive guidance comes from the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. In their Evidence to Decision Framework, developed to allow for explicit and transparent articulation of the important criteria that decision makers (ie, clinicians, guideline developers, and policy makers) use to inform their judgements, GRADE includes 1 domain called “health equity” that asks, “what would be the effect on health equity” of any given decision or recommendation.68 To answer this question, the framework articulates a set of questions to be answered:

  1. “Are there groups or settings that might be disadvantaged in relation to the problem or interventions (options) that are considered?

  2. Are there plausible reasons for anticipating differences in the relative effectiveness of the intervention (option) for disadvantaged groups or settings?

  3. Are there different baseline conditions across groups or settings that affect the absolute effectiveness of the intervention or the importance of the problem for disadvantaged groups or settings?

  4. Are there important considerations that should be made when implementing the intervention (option) to ensure that inequities are reduced, if possible, and that they are not increased?”

In addition to their guidance on the Evidence to Decision Framework, the GRADE working group issued a 4-article series in 2017 that provided additional guidance on how guideline panels should incorporate health equity considerations at various phases of the guideline process: setting priorities, establishing guideline group membership, identifying target audiences, generating guideline questions, considering the importance of outcomes and interventions, deciding what evidence to include and searching for evidence, summarizing the evidence and considering additional information, wording of recommendations, and evaluating and monitoring use of the recommendation (eTable 3 in the Supplement).69-72

Discussion

To address health equity in the US, it is necessary to continue to use racial and ethnic groupings as categorizations. However, the categorizations should be understood as social categorizations with true biological consequences through racism. Racism is complex and pervasive, and operates at multiple interrelated levels. Discrimination is only 1 aspect of racism, albeit the most studied domain of racism in health literature. Likewise, racism exerts its negative effects on SDH as well as health and well-being through multiple pathways. There are useful frameworks that describe the various mechanisms by which race and racism affect health.

In its reports, the USPSTF has addressed racial and ethnic disparities and health equity but not racism explicitly. The recommendation statements and the products that support the recommendation statements have used a variety of terminology and likewise have varied in their treatment of health equity. The systematic reviews to support the USPSTF do include interventions that may mitigate health disparities through cultural tailoring of behavioral interventions, but reviews have not explicitly addressed other commonly studied interventions to increase the uptake of preventive services or foster the implementation of preventive services. To date, other than interventions to improve cultural sensitivity of clinicians, there are not robustly studied interventions to directly address racism in medicine or health care.

Many organizations have issued recent statements and commitments around racism in health care, but few have provided substantive guidance on operational steps to address the effects of racism. The Proposed USPSTF Actions to Address Racism in Clinical Preventive Services Recommendations outlined in January 20211 are largely in line with guidance from the small group of organizations that have articulated plans for meaningful and long-term action on addressing racism in health care. When guidance is unavailable regarding the proposed actions, it is principally because work to achieve them is in early stages. The most directly relevant and immediately useful guidance identified is that from the GRADE working group.

Limitations

This methods review has several limitations. First, to our knowledge this is the first systematic effort to understand how race, and more specifically racism, and health inequities in racial and ethnic groups are addressed and can be addressed in USPSTF reports. Given that this is a rapidly evolving field, with many new publications, webinars, and ongoing efforts to address racism in health care and health inequities by race and ethnicity, this report can only represent a snapshot of the evidence to date. Second, for Aim 1, there was not a comprehensive summary of the effect of racism on health, nor was there a review of how racism is embedded in medicine and health care. Third, for Aim 2, the audit of the USPSTF reports and literature on interventions to mitigate health inequities focused on cancer and cardiovascular disease. While these are 2 large content areas in USPSTF reports and preventive health, there are other topics among USPSTF reports that are different enough to warrant investigating separately (eg, mental health and substance abuse, infectious disease). Fourth, other than health care coverage and workforce diversification, the focus was on patient and health-system level interventions and did not examine reviews on interventions at the community, public health, and policy levels, nor was there an examination of medical or other health professional school curricula interventions or interventions to encourage people of color to enter the health care field. Fifth, interventions to increase recruitment of underrepresented individuals in clinical research were not included, but this information will be important to improve the evidence base to address health equity. Sixth, the literature search process was restricted to MEDLINE, likely omitting relevant citations with a social science focus. Seventh, the review took a pragmatic approach to identify and audit health care and health care-relevant professional societies, guideline-making organizations, agencies, and funding bodies, given limited time and resources.

Conclusions

This methods report provides a summary of issues around racism and health inequity, including the status of how these are being addressed in preventive health.

Back to top
Article Information

Corresponding Author: Jennifer S. Lin, MD, Kaiser Permanente Evidence-based Practice Center, Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, 3800 N Interstate Ave, Portland, OR 97227 (jennifer.s.lin@kpchr.org).

Accepted for Publication: September 17, 2021.

Published Online: November 8, 2021. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.17579

Author Contributions: Dr Lin and Ms Hoffman had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Lin, Hoffman, O'Connor, Martin, Iacocca.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Lin, Hoffman, Bean, O'Connor, Martin, Bacon, Davies.

Drafting of the manuscript: Lin, Hoffman, Bean, Martin, Iacocca, Bacon.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Hoffman, O'Connor, Martin, Davies.

Obtained funding: Lin, Hoffman.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Hoffman, Bean, Martin, Iacocca, Bacon, Davies.

Supervision: Lin.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Funding/Support: This research was funded under contract HHSA290201600006C from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), US Department of Health and Human Services, to support the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: Investigators worked with USPSTF members and AHRQ staff to develop the scope of this review. AHRQ had no role in study selection or synthesis. AHRQ staff provided project oversight and reviewed the report to ensure that the analysis met methodological standards. Otherwise, AHRQ had no role in the conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript findings. The opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of AHRQ or the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Additional Contributions: We gratefully acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to this project: the AHRQ staff; the US Preventive Services Task Force; and Evidence-based Practice Center staff members Tracy Beil, MS, and Debra Burch for their administrative support.

Editorial Disclaimer: This methods report is presented as a document in support of the accompanying USPSTF statement. It did not undergo additional peer review after submission to JAMA.

References
1.
Doubeni  CA, Simon  M, Krist  AH.  Addressing systemic racism through clinical preventive service recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force.   JAMA. 2021;325(7):627-628. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.26188PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Lin  JS, Hoffman  L, Bean  SI, O’Connor  EA, Martin  AM, Iacocca  MO, Bacon  OP, Davies  MC.  Addressing Racism in Preventive Services: A Methods Project for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2021. AHRQ publication 21-05281-EF-2.
3.
Fuentes  A, Ackermann  RR, Athreya  S,  et al.  AAPA statement on race and racism.   Am J Phys Anthropol. 2019;169(3):400-402. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23882PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Hebert  PL, Sisk  JE, Howell  EA.  When does a difference become a disparity? conceptualizing racial and ethnic disparities in health.   Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(2):374-382. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.27.2.374PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Williams  DR.  Race and health: basic questions, emerging directions.   Ann Epidemiol. 1997;7(5):322-333. doi:10.1016/S1047-2797(97)00051-3PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Cosmides  L, Tooby  J, Kurzban  R.  Perceptions of race.   Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(4):173-179. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00057-3PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Yu  N, Chen  FC, Ota  S,  et al.  Larger genetic differences within Africans than between Africans and Eurasians.   Genetics. 2002;161(1):269-274. doi:10.1093/genetics/161.1.269PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Rosenberg  NA, Pritchard  JK, Weber  JL,  et al.  Genetic structure of human populations.   Science. 2002;298(5602):2381-2385. doi:10.1126/science.1078311PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Gannon  M. Race is a social construct, scientists argue. Scientific American [serial online]. Published February 5, 2016. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/
10.
New AMA policies recognize race as a social, not biological, construct. American Medical Association. Published November 6, 2020. Accessed June 2021. https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/new-ama-policies-recognize-race-social-not-biological-construct
11.
Trent  M, Dooley  DG, Dougé  J; Section on Adolescent Health; Council on Community Pediatrics; Committee on Adolescence.  The impact of racism on child and adolescent health.   Pediatrics. 2019;144(2):e20191765. doi:10.1542/peds.2019-1765PubMedGoogle Scholar
12.
Kahn  J.  How a drug becomes “ethnic”: law, commerce, and the production of racial categories in medicine.   Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics. 2004;4(1):1-46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
13.
Race. US Census Bureau. Accessed February 9, 2020. https://www.census.gov/topics/population/race/about.html
14.
Cruz-Flores  S, Rabinstein  A, Biller  J,  et al; American Heart Association Stroke Council; Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; Council on Epidemiology and Prevention; Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research.  Racial-ethnic disparities in stroke care: the American experience: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.   Stroke. 2011;42(7):2091-2116. doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e3182213e24PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
 Racial and Ethnic Categories and Definitions for NIH Diversity Programs and for Other Reporting Purposes. National Institutes of Health; 2015.
16.
Vanidestine  T, Aparicio  EM.  How social welfare and health professionals understand “race,” racism, and whiteness: a social justice approach to grounded theory.   Soc Work Public Health. 2019;34(5):430-443. doi:10.1080/19371918.2019.1616645PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Lee  C.  “Race” and “ethnicity” in biomedical research: how do scientists construct and explain differences in health?   Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(6):1183-1190. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.12.036PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Drevdahl  D, Taylor  JY, Phillips  DA.  Race and ethnicity as variables in Nursing Research, 1952-2000.   Nurs Res. 2001;50(5):305-313. doi:10.1097/00006199-200109000-00009PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Racial and ethnic identity. American Psychological Association. Accessed January 10, 2021. https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/racial-ethnic-minorities
20.
Structural racism and health equity language guide. American Heart Association. Published May 2021. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://professional.heart.org/en/science-news/-/media/e7ac17a71ec6494784247243f29525e0.ashx
21.
Flanagin  A, Frey  T, Christiansen  SL; AMA Manual of Style Committee.  Updated guidance on the reporting of race and ethnicity in medical and science journals.   JAMA. 2021;326(7):621-627. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.13304PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
University of South Carolina Aiken Department of Diversity Initiatives. Inclusive language guide. Accessed February 6, 2020. https://www.usca.edu/diversity-initiatives/training-resources/guide-to-inclusive-language/inclusive-language-guide/file
23.
JAMA Network Editors.  AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors. 11th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020.
24.
Milner  A, Jumbe  S.  Using the right words to address racial disparities in COVID-19.   Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(8):e419-e420. doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30162-6PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Bonilla-Silva  E.  Rethinking racism: toward a structural interpretation.   Am Sociol Rev. 1997;62(3):465-480. doi:10.2307/2657316Google ScholarCrossref
26.
Williams  DR, Mohammed  SA.  Racism and health I: pathways and scientific evidence.   Am Behav Sci. 2013;57(8). doi:10.1177/0002764213487340PubMedGoogle Scholar
27.
Williams  DR, Lawrence  JA, Davis  BA.  Racism and health: evidence and needed research.   Annu Rev Public Health. 2019;40:105-125. doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-043750PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Gee  GC, Ford  CL.  Structural racism and health inequities: old issues, new directions.   Du Bois Rev. 2011;8(1):115-132. doi:10.1017/S1742058X11000130PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Bailey  ZD, Krieger  N, Agénor  M, Graves  J, Linos  N, Bassett  MT.  Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions.   Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1453-1463. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-XPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Jones  CP.  Levels of racism: a theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale.   Am J Public Health. 2000;90(8):1212-1215. doi:10.2105/AJPH.90.8.1212 PubMedGoogle Scholar
31.
Howe  CJ, Dulin-Keita  A, Cole  SR,  et al; CFAR Network of Integrated Clinical Systems.  Evaluating the population impact on racial/ethnic disparities in HIV in adulthood of intervening on specific targets: a conceptual and methodological framework.   Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(2):316-325. doi:10.1093/aje/kwx247PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
La  IS, Lee  MC, Hinderer  KA,  et al.  Palliative care for the Asian American adult population: a scoping review.   Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):658-670. doi:10.1177/1049909120928063PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Hicken  MT, Kravitz-Wirtz  N, Durkee  M, Jackson  JS.  Racial inequalities in health: framing future research.   Soc Sci Med. 2018;199:11-18. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.027PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Tsai  W, Nusrath  S, Zhu  R.  Systematic review of depressive, anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms among Asian American breast cancer survivors.   BMJ Open. 2020;10(9):e037078. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037078PubMedGoogle Scholar
35.
Walton  J, Priest  N, Paradies  Y.  “It depends how you're saying it”: the conceptual complexities of everyday racism.   Int J Conf Violence. 2013;7(1):74-90.Google Scholar
36.
 Position Statement: Prejudice, Discrimination, and Racism. National Association of School Psychologists; 2019.
37.
Fiske  ST, Gilbert  DT, Gardner  L,.  Handbook of Social Psychology. John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
38.
Constitution of the World Health Organization: Basic Documents, 45th ed, Supplement. World Health Organization. Published October 2006. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf
39.
Ramírez García  JI.  Integrating Latina/o ethnic determinants of health in research to promote population health and reduce health disparities.   Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2019;25(1):21-31. doi:10.1037/cdp0000265PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
40.
US Department of Health and Human Services, Secretary’s Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2020. Phase I report: recommendations for the framework and format of Healthy People 2020: Section IV: Advisory Committee findings and recommendations. HealthyPeople.gov. Published October 28, 2008. Accessed November 18, 2020. https://www.healthypeople.gov/sites/default/files/PhaseI_0.pdf
41.
Marmot  M.  Health equity: the challenge.   Aust N Z J Public Health. 2012;36(6):513-514. doi:10.1111/j.1753-6405.2012.00948.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
42.
Social Determinates of Health. HealthyPeople.gov. Accessed January 21, 2021. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/social-determinants-of-health
43.
Solar  O, Irwin  A. A conceptual framework for action on the social determinants of health: Social Determinants of Health Discussion Paper 2 (Policy and Practice). World Health Organization. Published 2010. Accessed September 23, 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241500852
44.
Paradies  Y, Ben  J, Denson  N,  et al.  Racism as a determinant of health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.   PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0138511. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138511PubMedGoogle Scholar
45.
Paradies  Y, Truong  M, Priest  N.  A systematic review of the extent and measurement of healthcare provider racism.   J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(2):364-387. doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2583-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
46.
Vyas  DA, Eisenstein  LG, Jones  DS.  Hidden in plain sight—reconsidering the use of race correction in clinical algorithms.   N Engl J Med. 2020;383(9):874-882. doi:10.1056/NEJMms2004740PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
47.
Bailey  ZD, Krieger  N, Agénor  M, Graves  J, Linos  N, Bassett  MT.  Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions.   Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1453-1463. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30569-XPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
48.
Saha  S, Freeman  M, Toure  J, Tippens  KM, Weeks  C, Ibrahim  S.  Racial and ethnic disparities in the VA health care system: a systematic review.   J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(5):654-671. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0521-4PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
49.
Thrasher  AD, Clay  OJ, Ford  CL, Stewart  AL.  Theory-guided selection of discrimination measures for racial/ethnic health disparities research among older adults.   J Aging Health. 2012;24(6):1018-1043. doi:10.1177/0898264312440322PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
50.
Sarrazin  MS, Campbell  ME, Richardson  KK, Rosenthal  GE.  Racial segregation and disparities in health care delivery: conceptual model and empirical assessment.   Health Serv Res. 2009;44(4):1424-1444. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2009.00977.xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
51.
Fenton  JJ, Weyrich  MS, Durbin  S,  et al.  Prostate-specific antigen–based screening for prostate cancer: evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.   JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914-1931. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.3712PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
52.
Henderson  JT, Vesco  KK, Senger  CA, Thomas  RG, Redmond  N.  Aspirin Use to Prevent Preeclampsia and Related Morbidity and Mortality: An Evidence Update for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis No. 205. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2021. AHRQ publication 21-05274-EF-1.
53.
Nelson  HD CA, Wagner  J, Jungbauer  R, Quiñones  A, Fu  R, Stillman  L, Kondo  K.  Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2019.
54.
Garzón-Orjuela  N, Samacá-Samacá  DF, Luque Angulo  SC,  et al.  An overview of reviews on strategies to reduce health inequalities.   Int J Equity Health. 2020;19(1):192. doi:10.1186/s12939-020-01299-wPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
55.
Yadee  J, Bangpan  M, Thavorn  K, Welch  V, Tugwell  P, Chaiyakunapruk  N.  Assessing evidence of interventions addressing inequity among migrant populations: a two-stage systematic review.   Int J Equity Health. 2019;18(1):64. doi:10.1186/s12939-019-0970-xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
56.
Chae  D, Kim  J, Kim  S, Lee  J, Park  S.  Effectiveness of cultural competence educational interventions on health professionals and patient outcomes: a systematic review.   Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2020;17(3):e12326. doi:10.1111/jjns.12326PubMedGoogle Scholar
57.
Jongen  C, McCalman  J, Bainbridge  R.  Health workforce cultural competency interventions: a systematic scoping review.   BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):232. doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3001-5PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
58.
Filmer  T, Herbig  B.  Effectiveness of interventions teaching cross-cultural competencies to health-related professionals with work experience: a systematic review.   J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2018;38(3):213-221. doi:10.1097/CEH.0000000000000212PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
59.
Oikarainen  A, Mikkonen  K, Kenny  A,  et al.  Educational interventions designed to develop nurses’ cultural competence: a systematic review.   Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;98:75-86. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.06.005PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
60.
Clifford  A, McCalman  J, Bainbridge  R, Tsey  K.  Interventions to improve cultural competency in health care for Indigenous peoples of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA: a systematic review.   Int J Qual Health Care. 2015;27(2):89-98. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzv010PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
61.
Alizadeh  S, Chavan  M.  Cultural competence dimensions and outcomes: a systematic review of the literature.   Health Soc Care Community. 2016;24(6):e117-e130. doi:10.1111/hsc.12293PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
63.
Carr  RM, Quezada  SM, Gangarosa  LM,  et al; Governing Board of the American Gastroenterological Association.  From intention to action: operationalizing AGA diversity policy to combat racism and health disparities in gastroenterology.   Gastroenterology. 2020;159(5):1637-1647. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.07.044PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
64.
Patel  MI, Lopez  AM, Blackstock  W,  et al.  Cancer disparities and health equity: a policy statement from the American Society of Clinical Oncology.   J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(29):3439-3448. doi:10.1200/JCO.20.00642PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
65.
Serchen  J, Doherty  R, Atiq  O, Hilden  D; Health and Public Policy Committee of the American College of Physicians.  A comprehensive policy framework to understand and address disparities and discrimination in health and health care: a policy paper from the American College of Physicians.   Ann Intern Med. 2021;174(4):529-532. doi:10.7326/M20-7219PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
66.
Wyatt  R, Laderman  M, Botwinick  L,  et al. Achieving health equity: a guide for health care organizations. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Published 2016. Accessed June 14, 2021. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/IHIWhitePapers/Achieving-Health-Equity.aspx
67.
Ending structural racism: UNITE. National Institutes of Health. Accessed June 14, 2021. https://www.nih.gov/ending-structural-racism/unite
68.
Alonso-Coello  P, Schünemann  HJ, Moberg  J,  et al; GRADE Working Group.  GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices, 1: introduction.   BMJ. 2016;353:i2016. doi:10.1136/bmj.i2016PubMedGoogle Scholar
69.
Welch  VA, Akl  EA, Guyatt  G,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 1: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: introduction and rationale.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:59-67. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.014PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
70.
Akl  EA, Welch  V, Pottie  K,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 2: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: equity extension of the guideline development checklist.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:68-75. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.017PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
71.
Welch  VA, Akl  EA, Pottie  K,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 3: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: rating the certainty of synthesized evidence.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:76-83. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.01.015PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
72.
Pottie  K, Welch  V, Morton  R,  et al.  GRADE equity guidelines 4: considering health equity in GRADE guideline development: evidence to decision process.   J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:84-91. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.001PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
×