Explore the vast range of titles available.

The adage “time is money” signifies that time itself is a major social resource, but the role of time as a determinant of health inequities remains underappreciated. Time is fundamental to health promotion and human agency, as in having time to exercise and maintain social relationships. Further, scarcity in time is related to stress and illness. Time is also racialized, such that racial/ethnic minorities often have less free time and suffer a time penalty in multiple facets of life. Such penalties manifest in problems such as greater time in prison or more time spent accessing services. We argue that time may be a social determinant of health that is shaped by racism across the life course. We focus on three aspects: time as age, time as exposure, and time as a resource and privilege. We distinguish between chronological age, biological age, and social age. We discuss issues of accelerated aging and potential interconnections with critical periods. We also examine racial inequities in time. By more deeply considering time, we may advance our understanding of racial inequities in health.

Over the last decade, health information technology (IT) has dramatically transformed medical practice in the United States. On May 11–12, 2017, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, in partnership with the National Science Foundation and the National Health IT Collaborative for the Underserved, convened a scientific workshop, “Addressing Health Disparities with Health Information Technology,” with the goal of ensuring that future research guides potential health IT initiatives to address the needs of health disparities populations. The workshop examined patient, clinician, and system perspectives on the potential role of health IT in addressing health disparities. Attendees were asked to identify and discuss various health IT challenges that confront underserved communities and propose innovative strategies to address them, and to involve these communities in this process. Community engagement, cultural competency, and patient-centered care were highlighted as key to improving health equity, as well as to promoting scalable, sustainable, and effective health IT interventions. Participants noted the need for more research on how health IT can be used to evaluate and address the social determinants of health. Expanding public-private partnerships was emphasized, as was the importance of clinicians and IT developers partnering and using novel methods to learn how to improve health care decision-making. Finally, to advance health IT and promote health equity, it will be necessary to record and capture health disparity data using standardized terminology, and to continuously identify system-level deficiencies and biases.

Ethn Dis. 2021;31(Suppl 1):283-284;doi:10.18865/ed.31.S1.283

While the link between food insecurity and obesity are well documented in the research literature, more research is needed to better understand underlying mechanisms, associated risks, effective strategies and interventions, and implementation science approaches to mitigate these public health concerns.

The digital divide related to consumer information technologies (CITs) has diminished, thus increasing the potential to use CITs to overcome barriers of access to health interventions as well as to deliver interventions situated in the context of daily lives. However, the evidence base regarding the use and impact of CIT-enabled interventions in health disparity populations lags behind that for the general population. Literature and case examples are summarized to demonstrate the use of mHealth, telehealth, and social media as behavioral intervention platforms in health disparity populations, identify challenges to achieving their use, describe strategies for overcoming the challenges, and recommend future directions. The evidence base is emerging. However, challenges in design, implementation, and evaluation must be addressed for the promise to be fulfilled. Future directions include (1) improved design methods, (2) enhanced research reporting, (3) advancement of multilevel interventions, (4) rigorous evaluation, (5) efforts to address privacy concerns, and (6) inclusive design and implementation decisions.

The Office of Dietary Supplements, the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the National Institute on Aging, and the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, all components of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, co-sponsored an expert panel meeting to discuss the vitamin D paradox in Black Americans. The paradox is that despite markedly low (or “deficient”) measures of vitamin D status in Black Americans, the incidence of falls, fractures, or osteopenia are significantly lower compared to White American counterparts with similar vitamin D status. Six panelists were invited to engage in guided discussions on the state of the science with respect to key knowledge gaps impacting vitamin D status and bone health. They were also asked to reflect on best approaches for advancing the science. A central theme throughout the discussions was that there may be many factors that impact Vitamin D levels in Black Americans and understanding these factors may be key to understanding mechanisms for improving bone health in all populations. Data presented showed that although adiposity, skin pigmentation, vitamin D binding protein polymorphisms, and genetics all contributed to differences in 25(OH)D levels in Black vs. White Americans, no one factor alone could fully explain the vitamin D paradox in Black Americans. However, the panelists did agree that the paradox is significant and warrants further investigation. There was consensus that Black Americans gained no skeletal benefits from high doses of vitamin D supplementation, and that high levels of the biomarker of vitamin D status, serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D or 25(OH)D, in this population are almost certain to result in adverse effects. Some panelists proposed that additional studies are needed so that the Institute of Medicine (IOM) can better define the safe upper limits of vitamin D intake in this and other subpopulations. Others suggested a need for better, more generalizable biomarkers of bone health to advance the science.

Advancing health equity and reducing disparities through evidence-based policy research requires the expertise, insights, and active participation of various policy stakeholders – particularly those representing vulnerable populations who may be disproportionately affected by such policies. Unfortunately, there are few sustainable settings for these diverse stakeholders to convene, share their knowledge, develop and execute research in a collaborative fashion, and effectively translate evidencebased findings. The development of a health policy-focused center supports the collaborative structure needed to present a unified, multi-disciplinary approach toward informing health policy. The Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities Research (TCC) at Morehouse School of Medicine (U54MD008173) was funded in 2012 by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) as an innovative approach for conducting health policy research and disseminating evidence-based science to diverse stakeholders. This article provides an overview of the research projects, pilot project programs, infrastructure cores, communications, and strategic dissemination activities supported by the TCC.

We introduce the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD) research framework, a product that emerged from the NIMHD science visioning process. The NIMHD research framework is a multilevel, multidomain model that depicts a wide array of health determinants relevant to understanding and addressing minority health and health disparities and promoting health equity. We describe the conceptual underpinnings of the framework and define its components. We also describe how the framework can be used to assess minority health and health disparities research as well as priorities for the future. Finally, we describe how fiscal year 2015 research project grants funded by NIMHD map onto the framework, and we identify gaps and opportunities for future minority health and health disparities research.

Health disparities have persisted despite decades of efforts to eliminate them at the national, regional, state and local levels. Policies have been a driving force in creating and exacerbating health disparities, but they can also play a major role in eliminating disparities. Research evidence and input from affected community-level stakeholders are critical components of evidence-based health policy that will advance health equity. The Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center (TCC) for Health Disparities Research at Morehouse School of Medicine consists of five subprojects focused on studying and informing health equity policy related to maternal-child health, mental health, health information technology, diabetes, and leadership/workforce development. This article describes a “health equity lens” as defined, operationalized and applied by the TCC to inform health policy development, implementation, and analysis. Prioritizing health equity in laws and organizational policies provides an upstream foundation for ensuring that the laws are implemented at the midstream and downstream levels to advance health equity.

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: (1) To explain and discuss minority health and health disparities and the mechanisms, for example, individual behaviors and lifestyle, genetics and epigenetics, physical and cultural environment, and clinical events and health care, that lead to health disparities. (2) To explore the intersection between health disparity science and clinical and translational science. (3) To present and discuss the NIMHD Framework and how it can be used to guide multilevel research to address minority health and health disparities. (4) To highlight examples of NIMHD-funded novel and innovative research relevant to clinical and translational research from a health disparities perspective. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The NIMHD Research Framework will be introduced that is currently being used by NIMHD to address minority health and health disparity research. The Framework looks at targeted populations in relation to biological, behavioral, physical, and sociocultural environmental domains of influence as well as the health care system. These domains have different levels of influence: individual, family/interpersonal, community, and population. Targeted populations include NIH-designated health disparity populations, that include racial/ethnic minorities, socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, underserved rural populations, and sexual and gender minorities. The following research opportunities are among the many opportunities offered by NIMHD: Disparities in Surgical Care and Outcomes Social Epigenomics for Minority Health and Health Disparities Addressing Health Disparities Among Immigrant Populations. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Select examples of NIMHD supported minority health and health disparities research that intersects with clinical and translational research will be presented. Candidate examples include: Genetic Architecture of Lupus (SLE) in individuals with Asian ancestry; A Novel Racial Disparity Marker for Risk Prediction in Triple Negative Breast Cancer Patients; Self-Applied Wearable Ultrasound Therapy for Osteoarthritis Management in Rural Central NY; Design and Development of a Multifunctional Self-service Health Screening Kiosk. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Despite notable improvements gained as a result of medical and scientific advances, there continues to be an alarming disproportionate burden of illness and lack of representation in research among minority and other socially disadvantaged and underserved populations. To meet this challenge, NIMHD is committed to supporting a wide range of clinical and translational research aimed at the development of innovative strategies and approaches to reduce and, eventually, eliminate health disparities. NIMHD’s mission, research priorities, and funding opportunities are relevant to the efforts and interests of clinical and translational scientists, especially those interested in the translation of research findings into interventions, products, and tools that may improve minority health and quality of life, increase adherence to medication and treatment regimens, increase access, and improve the delivery of health services.