Search

Racism contributes to health inequities faced by people of colour and marginalised groups. Despite widespread recognition of the impacts of racism, mitigating strategies and legislation have been largely unsuccessful. Research into racism in healthcare has mostly examined personal experiences of healthcare workers and patients, assuming that the definitions of racism and race are similarly understood by all. However, ethnicity and race are often conflated, and racism seen as primarily interpersonal and ahistorical. This paper explores hospital employee understandings of racism, its impacts and how to reduce it. Forty-nine staff within one Australian hospital participated in individual qualitative interviews regarding the definition, impact, and ways of reducing racism. Interviews were analysed with a reflexive thematic analytic approach using a Postcolonial framework. Participants described racism as being experienced by marginalised groups of people in Australia. They identified that racism has detrimental effects on health and wellbeing. Not all were clear regarding what constituted racism: it was not described as an ideology created to justify colonial distribution of power and resources. Some thought that racism was individual prejudice while others noted it was also structural in nature. Participants commonly defined race as involving physical or cultural differences, suggesting that discredited historical and colonial concepts of race continue in Australian society. While many felt that education was the best way to reduce racism and its impacts, some participants noted that being educated did not necessarily change racist behaviour. The lack of accurate understanding of the concept of race and racism likely contributes to the relatively poor effect of current strategies to combat racism. As an initial part of deeper systemic anti-racist reform, this research supports calls for anti-racist education to clarify the definition of racism as an ideology. • Participants understood the detrimental impacts of racism in healthcare. • Participants showed unclear understandings of racism and its causes. • Anti-racist strategies must define race and racism, and acknowledge their history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marked ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 infection and its consequences have been documented. The aim of this paper is to identify the range and nature of evidence on potential pathways which lead to ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 related health outcomes in the United Kingdom (UK). We searched six bibliographic and five grey literature databases from 1st December 2019 to 23rd February 2022 for research on pathways to ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 health outcomes in the UK. Meta-data were extracted and coded, using a framework informed by a logic model. Open Science Framework Registration: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/HZRB7. The search returned 10,728 records after excluding duplicates, with 123 included (83% peer-reviewed). Mortality was the most common outcome investigated (N = 79), followed by infection (N = 52). The majority of studies were quantitative (N = 93, 75%), with four qualitative studies (3%), seven academic narrative reviews (6%), nine third sector reports (7%) and five government reports (4%), and four systematic reviews or meta-analyses (3%). There were 78 studies which examined comorbidities as a pathway to mortality, infection, and severe disease. Socioeconomic inequalities (N = 67) were also commonly investigated, with considerable research into neighbourhood infrastructure (N = 38) and occupational risk (N = 28). Few studies examined barriers to healthcare (N = 6) and consequences of infection control measures (N = 10). Only 11% of eligible studies theorised racism to be a driver of inequalities and 10% (typically government/third sector reports and qualitative studies) explored this as a pathway. This systematic map identified knowledge clusters that may be amenable to subsequent systematic reviews, and critical gaps in the evidence-base requiring additional primary research. Most studies do not incorporate or conceptualise racism as the fundamental cause of ethnic inequalities and therefore the contribution to literature and policy is limited. • 123 UK studies examined pathways to ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 outcomes. • Socioeconomic inequalities and comorbidities were commonly explored as pathways. • 30% of studies aggregated ethnic groups into one broad category (e.g., non-White). • Only 11% studies considered racism as a driver of ethnic inequalities. • We provide recommendations for future research into ethnic inequalities in health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many parts of the world nursing home residents have experienced a disproportionate risk of exposure to COVID-19 and have died at much higher rates than other groups. There is a critical need to identify the factors driving COVID-19 risk in nursing homes to better understand and address the conditions contributing to their vulnerability during public health crises. This study investigates the characteristics associated with COVID-19 cases and deaths among residents in U.S. nursing homes from 2020 to 2021, with a focus on geospatial and racial inequalities. Using data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and LTCFocus, this paper uses zero-inflated negative binomial regression models, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and Local Moran's I to generate statistical and geospatial results. Our analysis reveals that majority Hispanic facilities have alarmingly high COVID-19 cases and deaths, suggesting that these facilities have the greatest need for policy improvements in staffing and financing to reduce racial inequalities in nursing home care. At the same time we also detect COVID-19 hot spots in rural areas with predominately White residents, indicating a need to rethink public messaging strategies in these areas. The top states with COVID-19 hot spots are Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Oklahoma. This research provides new insights into the socio-spatial contexts and inequities that contribute to the vulnerability of nursing home residents during a pandemic. • Geographic and racial inequalities are important indicators of covid-19 risk. • Covid-19 cases & deaths are high among facilities with majority Hispanic residents. • Facilities with majority Hispanic residents have high covid-19 vaccination rates. • Most covid-19 hot spots of cases & deaths are in predominantly White, rural areas. • The top states with covid-19 hot spots of cases & deaths are KY, PA, IL, and OK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been growing recognition of the popularity of medical crowdfunding and research documenting how crowdfunding arises from, and contributes to, social and health inequities. While many researchers have surmised that racism could well play a role in medical crowdfunding campaign outcomes, research on these dynamics has been limited. No research to date has examined these dynamics among the most successful medical crowdfunding campaigns, focusing instead on average users' experiences or specific patient subpopulations. This paper analyzes key characteristics and demographics of the 827 most successful medical crowdfunding campaigns captured at a point in time in 2020 on the popular site GoFundMe, creating the first demographic archetype of "viral" or highly successful campaigns. We hypothesized that this sample would skew towards whiter, younger populations, more heavily represent men, and reflect critical illnesses and accidents affecting these populations, in addition to having visually appealing, well-crafted storytelling. Analysis supported these hypotheses, showing significant levels of racial and gender disparities among campaigners. While white men had the greatest representation, Black and Asian users, and black women in particular, were highly underrepresented. Like other studies, we find evidence that racial and gender disparities persist in terms of campaign outcomes as well. Alongside this quantitative analysis, a targeted discourse analysis revealed campaign narratives and comments reinforced racist and sexist tropes of selective deservingness. These findings add to growing calls for more health research into the ways that social media technologies shape health inequities for historically marginalized and disenfranchised populations. In particular, we underscore how successful crowdfunding campaigns, as a both a means of raising funds for health and a broader site of public engagement, may deepen and normalize gendered and racialized inequities. In this way, crowdfunding can be seen as a significant technological amplifier of the fundamental social causes of health disparities. • Highly successful medical crowdfunding campaigns show disparities by race, gender, and age. • White men are significantly over-represented in highly successful campaigns. • Black people, and Black women in particular, are significantly underrepresented. • Black women's campaigns represented only.6% of highly successful medical campaigns. • Crowdfunding can reinforce and amplify racist and sexist perceptions of deservingness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on U.S. population health has been devastating, it has not affected everyone equally. The risks of hospitalization and death from the disease are relatively low for the population as a whole, but much higher for specific subpopulations defined by age, health status, and race or ethnicity. The extent to which Americans perceive these disparities is an open question, with potentially important political implications. Recognition of unequal impacts may prime concerns about justice and fairness, making Americans more concerned and willing to support government intervention. On the other hand, belief that the pandemic primarily threatens "other people" or out-groups may reduce, rather than increase, a person's concern. Partisanship and media consumption habits are also likely to play a role in these perceptions, as they do in most issues related to COVID-19. In this paper, we use original survey data from the Cooperative Election Study (N = 1000) to explore Americans' perceptions of which groups are most harmed by the pandemic, the demographic and political determinants of these perceptions, and the relationship of these perceptions with their opinions about COVID-related mitigation policy. We find that, on average, people perceived accurately that certain groups (e.g., Black Americans, older people) were more affected, but these group perceptions varied by demographic and political characteristics of respondents. We find, in contrast with recent experimental evidence, that the perception that populations of color were harmed was associated with more support for pandemic mitigation strategies. More research should investigate the relationships among pandemic politics and the racial dynamics of the target populations most affected. • In fall 2020, survey participants recognized groups harmed by COVID based on age. • They had lower recognition of racial groups harmed, lowest for Native Americans. • Perceptions of groups harmed varies by information exposure and politics. • Perceiving group disparities was associated with more support for pandemic policy. • The racial dynamics surrounding the politics of COVID-19 requires more attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the first longitudinal study of sex disparities in COVID-19 cases and mortalities across U.S. states, derived from the unique 13-month dataset of the U.S. Gender/Sex COVID-19 Data Tracker. To analyze sex disparities, weekly case and mortality rates by sex and mortality rate ratios were computed for each U.S. state, and a multilevel crossed-effects conditional logistic binomial regression model was fitted to estimate the variation of the sex disparity in mortality over time and across states. Results demonstrate considerable variation in the sex disparity in COVID-19 cases and mortalities over time and between states. These data suggest that the sex disparity, when present, is modest, and likely varies in relation to context-sensitive variables, which may include health behaviors, preexisting health status, occupation, race/ethnicity, and other markers of social experience. • First report of findings from unique longitudinal dataset of sex-disaggregated COVID-19 data in U.S. states. • Sex disparities in COVID-19 are highly heterogeneous in magnitude and direction and vary across states and over time. • Gender-related and other social and contextual factors likely shape COVID-19 sex disparities. • Single-factor approaches are ill-positioned to explain patterns in sex disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1845, Friedrich Engels identified how the living and working conditions experienced by English workers sent them prematurely to the grave, arguing that those responsible for these conditions -- ruling authorities and the bourgeoisie -- were committing social murder. The concept remained, for the most part, dormant in academic journals through the 1900s. Since 2000, there has been a revival of the social murder concept with its growth especially evident in the UK over the last decade as a result of the Grenfell Tower Fire and the effects of austerity imposed by successive Conservative governments. The purpose of this paper is to document the reemergence of the concept of social murder in academic journal articles. To do so we conducted a scoping review of content applying the social murder concept since 1900 in relation to health and well-being. We identified two primary concepts of social murder: social murder as resulting from capitalist exploitation and social murder as resulting from bad public policy across the domains of working conditions, living conditions, poverty, housing, race, health inequalities, crime and violence, neoliberalism, gender, food, social assistance, deregulation and austerity. We consider reasons for the reemergence of Engels' social murder concept and the role it can play in resisting the forces responsible for the living and working conditions that kill. • In 1845 Engels saw the health effects of capitalist exploitation as social murder. • The term was rarely applied in academic journals through the 20th century. • The early 1970s saw it being used to explain adverse health outcomes. • Since 2010, an exponential increase has been driven by developments in the UK. • These developments include the Grenfell Tower Fire and imposition of austerity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]