Search

Objectives: We aim to (1) evaluate the methods used in systematic reviews of interventions focused on racialized populations to improve racial health equity and (2) examine the types of interventions evaluated for advancing racial health equity in systematic reviews., Study Design and Setting: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Campbell databases for reviews evaluating interventions focused on racialized populations to mitigate racial health inequities, published from January 2020 to January 2023., Results: We analyzed 157 reviews on racialized populations. Only 22 (14%) reviews addressed racism's role in driving racial health inequities related to the review question. Eleven percent (7) of reviews considered intersectionality when conceptualizing racial inequities. Two-thirds (105, 67%) provided descriptive summaries of included studies rather than synthesizing them. Among those that quantified effect sizes, 54% (21) used biased synthesis methods like vote counting. The most common method assessed was tailoring interventions to meet the needs of racialized populations. Reviews mainly focused on assessing interventions to reduce racial disparities rather than enhancing structural opportunities for racialized populations., Conclusion: Reviews for racial health equity could be improved by enhancing methodologic quality, defining the role of racism in the question, using reliable analytical methods, and assessing process and implementation outcomes. More focus is needed on assessing structural interventions to improve opportunities for racialized populations and prioritize these issues in political and social agendas., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To systematically evaluate definitions of "racial health equity" (RHE) and related terms within health-related academic literature., Study Design and Setting: We systematically evaluated definitions of RHE and related terms within health-related academic articles. Articles published in English were included, and no date restrictions were imposed., Results: We found 20 original articles containing relevant definitions out of 1816 retrieved articles, thirteen of which were published from 2020 to 2023. Themes used in the definitions varied; racism (n = 12) and quality of healthcare (n = 10) were the most common. Additional themes, including social hierarchy or marginalization, discrimination, justice, unmet social needs, and historical events were described within some definitions. Eleven of the included manuscripts defined race as a social construct., Conclusion: This study depicts RHE as an emerging concept with limited consensus on racism, quality of health, and social determinants of health as important underlying frameworks. To center equity efforts and actions under a workable and shared vision, we recommend continued discussions regarding underlying meanings of RHE concepts and propose establishing a definition that promotes unity across health fields and prevents ambiguity., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Social needs interventions aim to improve health outcomes and mitigate inequities by addressing health-related social needs, such as lack of transportation or food insecurity. However, it is not clear whether these studies are reducing racial or ethnic inequities., Objective: To understand how studies of interventions addressing social needs among multiracial or multiethnic populations conceptualize and analyze differential intervention outcomes by race or ethnicity., Evidence Review: Sources included a scoping review of systematic searches of PubMed and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 1995, through November 29, 2021, expert suggestions, and hand searches of key citations. Eligible studies evaluated interventions addressing social needs; reported behavioral, health, or utilization outcomes or harms; and were conducted in multiracial or multiethnic populations. Two reviewers independently assessed titles, abstracts, and full text for inclusion. The team developed a framework to assess whether the study was "conceptually thoughtful" for understanding root causes of racial health inequities (ie, noted that race or ethnicity are markers of exposure to racism) and whether analyses were "analytically informative" for advancing racial health equity research (ie, examined differential intervention impacts by race or ethnicity)., Findings: Of 152 studies conducted in multiracial or multiethnic populations, 44 studies included race or ethnicity in their analyses; of these, only 4 (9%) were conceptually thoughtful. Twenty-one studies (14%) were analytically informative. Seven of 21 analytically informative studies reported differences in outcomes by race or ethnicity, whereas 14 found no differences. Among the 7 that found differential outcomes, 4 found the interventions were associated with improved outcomes for minoritized racial or ethnic populations or reduced inequities between minoritized and White populations. No studies were powered to detect differences., Conclusions and Relevance: In this review of a scoping review, studies of social needs interventions in multiracial or multiethnic populations were rarely conceptually thoughtful for understanding root causes of racial health inequities and infrequently conducted informative analyses on intervention effectiveness by race or ethnicity. Future work should use a theoretically sound conceptualization of how race (as a proxy for racism) affects social drivers of health and use this understanding to ensure social needs interventions benefit minoritized racial and ethnic groups facing social and structural barriers to health.