Explore the vast range of titles available.

abstract We used data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey to explore potential explanations for racial/ethnic disparities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations and mortality. Black adults in every age group were more likely than White adults to have health risks associated with severe COVID-19 illness. However, Whites were older, on average, than Blacks. Thus, when all factors were considered, Whites tended to be at higher overall risk compared with Blacks, with Asians and Hispanics having much lower overall levels of risk compared with either Whites or Blacks. We explored additional explanations for COVID19 disparities-namely, differences in job characteristics and how they interact with household composition. Blacks at high risk for severe illness were 1.6 times as likely as Whites to live in households containing health-sector workers. Among Hispanic adults at high risk for severe illness, 64.5 percent lived in households with at least one worker who was unable to work from home, versus 56.5 percent among Black adults and only 46.6 percent among White adults.

Despite a growing body of epidemiological evidence in recent years documenting the health impacts of racism, the cumulative evidence base has yet to be synthesized in a comprehensive meta-analysis focused specifically on racism as a determinant of health. This meta-analysis reviewed the literature focusing on the relationship between reported racism and mental and physical health outcomes. Data from 293 studies reported in 333 articles published between 1983 and 2013, and conducted predominately in the U.S., were analysed using random effects models and mean weighted effect sizes. Racism was associated with poorer mental health (negative mental health: r = -.23, 95% CI [-.24,-.21], k = 227; positive mental health: r = -.13, 95% CI [-.16,-.10], k = 113), including depression, anxiety, psychological stress and various other outcomes. Racism was also associated with poorer general health (r = -.13 (95% CI [-.18,-.09], k = 30), and poorer physical health (r = -.09, 95% CI [-.12,-.06], k = 50). Moderation effects were found for some outcomes with regard to study and exposure characteristics. Effect sizes of racism on mental health were stronger in cross-sectional compared with longitudinal data and in non-representative samples compared with representative samples. Age, sex, birthplace and education level did not moderate the effects of racism on health. Ethnicity significantly moderated the effect of racism on negative mental health and physical health: the association between racism and negative mental health was significantly stronger for Asian American and Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants, and the association between racism and physical health was significantly stronger for Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants. Protocol PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013005464.

In the United States, people of color face disparities in access to health care, the quality of care received, and health outcomes. The attitudes and behaviors of health care providers have been identified as one of many factors that contribute to health disparities. Implicit attitudes are thoughts and feelings that often exist outside of conscious awareness, and thus are difficult to consciously acknowledge and control. These attitudes are often automatically activated and can influence human behavior without conscious volition. We investigated the extent to which implicit racial/ethnic bias exists among health care professionals and examined the relationships between health care professionals' implicit attitudes about racial/ethnic groups and health care outcomes. To identify relevant studies, we searched 10 computerized bibliographic databases and used a reference harvesting technique. We assessed eligibility using double independent screening based on a priori inclusion criteria. We included studies if they sampled existing health care providers or those in training to become health care providers, measured and reported results on implicit racial/ethnic bias, and were written in English. We included a total of 15 studies for review and then subjected them to double independent data extraction. Information extracted included the citation, purpose of the study, use of theory, study design, study site and location, sampling strategy, response rate, sample size and characteristics, measurement of relevant variables, analyses performed, and results and findings. We summarized study design characteristics, and categorized and then synthesized substantive findings. Almost all studies used cross-sectional designs, convenience sampling, US participants, and the Implicit Association Test to assess implicit bias. Low to moderate levels of implicit racial/ethnic bias were found among health care professionals in all but 1 study. These implicit bias scores are similar to those in the general population. Levels of implicit bias against Black, Hispanic/Latino/Latina, and dark-skinned people were relatively similar across these groups. Although some associations between implicit bias and health care outcomes were nonsignificant, results also showed that implicit bias was significantly related to patient-provider interactions, treatment decisions, treatment adherence, and patient health outcomes. Implicit attitudes were more often significantly related to patient-provider interactions and health outcomes than treatment processes. Most health care providers appear to have implicit bias in terms of positive attitudes toward Whites and negative attitudes toward people of color. Future studies need to employ more rigorous methods to examine the relationships between implicit bias and health care outcomes. Interventions targeting implicit attitudes among health care professionals are needed because implicit bias may contribute to health disparities for people of color.

Bridging research in social psychology with scholarship on racialized organizations, this article shows how individual bias and organizational demographic composition can operate together to shape the degree of discrimination in schools. To understand Black and Latino boys’ higher rates of discipline that persist net of differences in behavior, I combine an original video experiment involving 1,339 teachers in 295 U.S. schools with organizational data on school racial/ethnic and socioeconomic composition. In the experiment, teachers view and respond to a randomly assigned video of a White, Black, or Latino boy committing identical, routine classroom misbehavior. I find that, compared to White boys, Black and Latino boys face a double jeopardy. They experience both (1) individual-level teacher bias, where they are perceived as being more “blameworthy” and referred more readily for identical misbehavior, and (2) racialized organizational climates of heightened blaming, where students of all races/ethnicities are perceived as being more “blameworthy” for identical misbehavior in schools with large minority populations versus in predominantly White schools. This study develops a more comprehensive understanding of the production of racial/ethnic inequality in school discipline by empirically identifying a dual process that involves both individual teacher bias and heightened blaming that is related to minority organizational composition.

Massachusetts has one of the highest cumulative incidence rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in the US. Understanding which specific demographic, economic, and occupational factors have contributed to disparities in COVID-19 incidence rates across the state is critical to informing public health strategies. We performed a cross-sectional study of 351 Massachusetts cities and towns from January 1 to May 6, 2020, and found that a 10-percentage-point increase in the Black non-Latino population was associated with an increase of 312.3 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population, whereas a 10-percentage-point increase in the Latino population was associated with an increase of 258.2 cases per 100,000. Independent predictors of higher COVID-19 rates included the proportion of foreign-born noncitizens living in a community, mean household size, and share of food service workers. After adjustment for these variables, the association between the Latino population and COVID-19 rates was attenuated. In contrast, the association between the Black population and COVID-19 rates persisted but may be explained by other systemic inequities. Public health and policy efforts that improve care for foreign-born noncitizens, address crowded housing, and protect food service workers may help mitigate the spread of COVID-19 among minority communities.

Large disparities in health insurance coverage and access to health services have long persisted in the US health care system. We considered how the insurance coverage expansions of the Affordable care Act have affected disparities related to race and ethnicity. In the years since the law went into effect, insurance coverage has increased significantly for all racial/ethnic groups. Because coverage increased more for non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics than for non-Hispanic whites, disparities in coverage have decreased. Despite these improvements, a large number of adults remain uninsured, and the uninsurance rate among blacks and Hispanics is substantially higher than the rate among whites.

Given the results from early trials, COVID-19 vaccines will be available by 2021. However, little is known about what Americans think of getting immunized with a COVID-19 vaccine. Thus, the purpose of this study was to conduct a comprehensive and systematic national assessment of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a community-based sample of the American adult population. A multi‐item valid and reliable questionnaire was deployed online via mTurk and social media sites to recruit U.S. adults from the general population. A total of 1878 individuals participated in the study where the majority were: females (52%), Whites (74%), non-Hispanic (81%), married (56%), employed full time (68%), and with a bachelor’s degree or higher (77%). The likelihood of getting a COVID-19 immunization in the study population was: very likely (52%), somewhat likely (27%), not likely (15%), definitely not (7%), with individuals who had lower education, income, or perceived threat of getting infected being more likely to report that they were not likely/definitely not going to get COVID-19 vaccine (i.e., vaccine hesitancy). In unadjusted group comparisons, compared to their counterparts, vaccine hesitancy was higher among African-Americans (34%), Hispanics (29%), those who had children at home (25%), rural dwellers (29%), people in the northeastern U.S. (25%), and those who identified as Republicans (29%). In multiple regression analyses, vaccine hesitancy was predicted significantly by sex, education, employment, income, having children at home, political affiliation, and the perceived threat of getting infected with COVID-19 in the next 1 year. Given the high prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, evidence-based communication, mass media strategies, and policy measures will have to be implemented across the U.S. to convert vaccines into vaccinations and mass immunization with special attention to the groups identified in this study.

With a population of forty million and substantial geographic variation in sociodemographics and health services, California is an important setting in which to study disparities. Its population (37.5 percent White, 39.1 percent Latino, 5.3 percent Black, and 14.4 percent Asian) experienced 59,258 COVID-19 deaths through April 14, 2021-the most of any state. We analyzed California's racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 exposure risks, testing rates, test positivity, and case rates through October 2020, combining data from 15.4 million SARS-CoV-2 tests with subcounty exposure risk estimates from the American Community Survey. We defined \"high-exposure-risk\" households as those with one or more essential workers and fewer rooms than inhabitants. Latino people in California are 8.1 times more likely to live in high-exposure-risk households than White people (23.6 percent versus 2.9 percent), are overrepresented in cumulative cases (3,784 versus 1,112 per 100,000 people), and are underrepresented in cumulative testing (35,635 versus 48,930 per 100,000 people). These risks and outcomes were worse for Latino people than for members of other racial/ethnic minority groups. Subcounty disparity analyses can inform targeting of interventions and resources, including community-based testing and vaccine access measures. Tracking COVID-19 disparities and developing equity-focused public health programming that mitigates the effects of systemic racism can help improve health outcomes among California's populations of color.

Internationalisation is a dominant policy discourse in the field of higher education today, driven by an assemblage of economic, social and educational concerns. It is often presented as an ideologically neutral, coherent, disembodied, knowledge-driven policy intervention-an unconditional good. Mobility is one of the key mechanisms through which internationalisation occurs, and is perceived as a major form of professional and identity capital in the academic labour market. Yet, questions remain about whether opportunity structures for mobility are unevenly distributed among different social groups and geopolitical spaces. While research studies and statistical data are freely available about the flows of international students, there is far less critical attention paid to the mobility of academics. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 14 migrant academics from diverse ethnic backgrounds, including Roma and Latin American communities, and the theoretical framings of the new mobility paradigm and cognitive and epistemic justice, this article explores some of the hidden narratives of migrant academics' engagements with mobility in the global knowledge economy. It concludes that there is a complex coagulation of opportunities and constraints. While there are many gains including transcultural learning, enhanced employability and inter-cultural competencies, there are also less romantic aspects to mobility including 'otherness', affective considerations such as isolation, and epistemic exclusions, raising questions about whose knowledge is circulating in the global academy. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).

Growing evidence suggests a low engagement in advance care planning (ACP) among ethnic minorities in the U.S. The purpose of this study was to synthesize findings from prior research about ACP among ethnic minorities. An extensive literature search was conducted using multiple electronic databases. After applying inclusion criteria, 26 studies were included. Four categories of facilitators and barriers to ACP were identified: (1) Socio-demographic factors, (2) health status, literacy and experiences, (3) cultural values, and (4) spirituality. Socio-demographic factors showed inconsistent findings regarding their association with ACP engagement. Worse health status and knowledge about ACP are common facilitators across ethnic minority groups, whereas mistrust toward the health care system was a barrier only for Blacks. Collectivistic cultural values influenced ACP engagement among Latinos and Asian Americans; however, spirituality/religion played an important role among Blacks. The implications for culturally competent approaches to promote ACP and future research directions are discussed.