Explore the vast range of titles available.

As the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic spreads throughout the United States, evidence is mounting that racial and ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups are bearing a disproportionate burden of illness and death. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of COVID-19 patients at Sutter Health, a large integrated health system in northern California, to measure potential disparities. We used Sutter's integrated electronic health record to identify adults with suspected and confirmed COVID-19, and we used multivariable logistic regression to assess risk of hospitalization, adjusting for known risk factors, such as race/ethnicity, sex, age, health, and socioeconomic variables. We analyzed 1,052 confirmed cases of COVID-19 from the period January 1-April 8, 2020. Among our findings, we observed that compared with non-Hispanic white patients, nonHispanic African American patients had 2.7 times the odds of hospitalization, after adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, and income. We explore possible explanations for this, including societal factors that either result in barriers to timely access to care or create circumstances in which patients view delaying care as the most sensible option. Our study provides real-world evidence of racial and ethnic disparities in the presentation of COVID-19.

Worldwide, racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 with increased risk of infection, its related complications, and death. In the initial phase of population-based vaccination in the United States (U.S.) and United Kingdom (U.K.), vaccine hesitancy may result in differences in uptake. We performed a cohort study among U.S. and U.K. participants who volunteered to take part in the smartphone-based COVID Symptom Study (March 2020-February 2021) and used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios of vaccine hesitancy and uptake. In the U.S. ( n  = 87,388), compared to white participants, vaccine hesitancy was greater for Black and Hispanic participants and those reporting more than one or other race. In the U.K. ( n  = 1,254,294), racial and ethnic minority participants showed similar levels of vaccine hesitancy to the U.S. However, associations between participant race and ethnicity and levels of vaccine uptake were observed to be different in the U.S. and the U.K. studies. Among U.S. participants, vaccine uptake was significantly lower among Black participants, which persisted among participants that self-reported being vaccine-willing. In contrast, statistically significant racial and ethnic disparities in vaccine uptake were not observed in the U.K sample. In this study of self-reported vaccine hesitancy and uptake, lower levels of vaccine uptake in Black participants in the U.S. during the initial vaccine rollout may be attributable to both hesitancy and disparities in access. The authors show differences in self-reported vaccine hesitancy and uptake among participants from different racial and ethnic groups in the United States and in the United Kingdom during the initial phase of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout.

Although socioeconomic status partly explains ethnic disparities seen with covid-19, cultural and structural racism also adversely affect health, argue Mohammad Razai and colleagues

We use the UK Household Longitudinal Study and compare pre-COVID-19 pandemic (2017-2019) and during-COVID-19 pandemic data (April 2020) for the same group of individuals to assess and quantify changes in mental health as measured by changes in the GHQ-12 (General Health Questionnaire), among ethnic groups in the UK. We confirm the previously documented average deterioration in mental health for the whole sample of individuals interviewed before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we find that the average increase in mental distress varies by ethnicity and gender. Both women –regardless of their ethnicity– and Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) men experienced a higher average increase in mental distress than White British men, so that the gender gap in mental health increases only among White British individuals. These ethnic-gender specific changes in mental health persist after controlling for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Finally, we find some evidence that, among men, Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani individuals have experienced the highest average increase in mental distress with respect to White British men.

AbstractObjectivesTo describe a national cohort of pregnant women admitted to hospital with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in the UK, identify factors associated with infection, and describe outcomes, including transmission of infection, for mothers and infants.DesignProspective national population based cohort study using the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS).SettingAll 194 obstetric units in the UK.Participants427 pregnant women admitted to hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between 1 March 2020 and 14 April 2020.Main outcome measuresIncidence of maternal hospital admission and infant infection. Rates of maternal death, level 3 critical care unit admission, fetal loss, caesarean birth, preterm birth, stillbirth, early neonatal death, and neonatal unit admission.ResultsThe estimated incidence of admission to hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy was 4.9 (95% confidence interval 4.5 to 5.4) per 1000 maternities. 233 (56%) pregnant women admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy were from black or other ethnic minority groups, 281 (69%) were overweight or obese, 175 (41%) were aged 35 or over, and 145 (34%) had pre-existing comorbidities. 266 (62%) women gave birth or had a pregnancy loss; 196 (73%) gave birth at term. Forty one (10%) women admitted to hospital needed respiratory support, and five (1%) women died. Twelve (5%) of 265 infants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, six of them within the first 12 hours after birth.ConclusionsMost pregnant women admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection were in the late second or third trimester, supporting guidance for continued social distancing measures in later pregnancy. Most had good outcomes, and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to infants was uncommon. The high proportion of women from black or minority ethnic groups admitted with infection needs urgent investigation and explanation.Study registrationISRCTN 40092247.

There are well-established disparities in cancer incidence and outcomes by race/ethnicity that result from the interplay between structural, socioeconomic, socio-environmental, behavioural and biological factors. However, large research studies designed to investigate factors contributing to cancer aetiology and progression have mainly focused on populations of European origin. The limitations in clinicopathological and genetic data, as well as the reduced availability of biospecimens from diverse populations, contribute to the knowledge gap and have the potential to widen cancer health disparities. In this review, we summarise reported disparities and associated factors in the United States of America (USA) for the most common cancers (breast, prostate, lung and colon), and for a subset of other cancers that highlight the complexity of disparities (gastric, liver, pancreas and leukaemia). We focus on populations commonly identified and referred to as racial/ethnic minorities in the USA—African Americans/Blacks, American Indians and Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians/other Pacific Islanders and Hispanics/Latinos. We conclude that even though substantial progress has been made in understanding the factors underlying cancer health disparities, marked inequities persist. Additional efforts are needed to include participants from diverse populations in the research of cancer aetiology, biology and treatment. Furthermore, to eliminate cancer health disparities, it will be necessary to facilitate access to, and utilisation of, health services to all individuals, and to address structural inequities, including racism, that disproportionally affect racial/ethnic minorities in the USA.

Diversity in surgery has been shown to improve mentorship and patient care. Diversity has improved among general surgery (GS) trainees but is not the case for departmental leadership. We analyzed the race and gender distributions across leadership positions at academic GS programs. Academic GS programs (n = 118) listed by the Fellowship and Residency Electronic Interactive Database Access system were included. Leadership positions were ascertained from department websites. Gender and race were determined through publicly provided data. Ninety-two (79.3%) department chairs were white and 99 (85.3%) were men. Additionally, 88 (74.6%) program directors and 34 (77.3%) vice-chairs of education were men. A higher proportion of associate program directors were women (38.5%). Of 787 division-chiefs, 73.4% were white. Only trauma had >10% representation from minority surgeons. Women represented >10% of division chiefs in colorectal, thoracic, pediatric, and plastic/burn surgery. Diversity among GS trainees is not yet reflected in departmental leadership. Effort is needed to improve disparities in representation across leadership roles. [Display omitted] •Improvement in diversity is not reflected in departmental leadership.•More women serve as associate program directors than other leadership positions.•Only 4 specialties had >10% representation from women as division-chiefs.•Only trauma/ACS had >10% representation from minorities.•Highlights lack of diversity and need for increased representation in leadership. Brief Summary: While general surgery trainees have become increasingly diverse, this improvement is not yet reflected in departmental leadership. Currently, more women serve as associate program directors than other leadership positions. However, only 4 specialties have >10% representation from women as division chiefs and only trauma/ACS had >10% representation from any underrepresented minorities. This highlights the lack of diversity and the need for increased representation in general surgery leadership.

Background Despite renewed interest in studying the safety and efficacy of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy for the treatment of psychological disorders, the enrollment of racially diverse participants and the unique presentation of psychopathology in this population has not been a focus of this potentially ground-breaking area of research. In 1993, the United States National Institutes of Health issued a mandate that funded research must include participants of color and proposals must include methods for achieving diverse samples. Methods A methodological search of psychedelic studies from 1993 to 2017 was conducted to evaluate ethnoracial differences in inclusion and effective methods of recruiting peopple of color. Results Of the 18 studies that met full criteria ( n  = 282 participants), 82.3% of the participants were non-Hispanic White, 2.5% were African-American, 2.1% were of Latino origin, 1.8% were of Asian origin, 4.6% were of indigenous origin, 4.6% were of mixed race, 1.8% identified their race as “other,” and the ethnicity of 8.2% of participants was unknown. There were no significant differences in recruitment methodologies between those studies that had higher (> 20%) rates of inclusion. Conclusions As minorities are greatly underrepresented in psychedelic medicine studies, reported treatment outcomes may not generalize to all ethnic and cultural groups. Inclusion of minorities in futures studies and improved recruitment strategies are necessary to better understand the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy in people of color and provide all with equal opportunities for involvement in this potentially promising treatment paradigm.

The percentage of women enrolled in U.S. medical schools doubled during the past four decades; now, more than half the students are women. The percentage of Asian enrollees increased substantially. The percentages of enrollees from Black, Hispanic, and other underrepresented racial and ethnic groups remain well below the respective percentages of these groups in U.S. Census data.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed unprecedented strain on patients and health care professionals and institutions, but the association of the pandemic with use of preventive, elective, and nonelective care, as well as potential disparities in use of health care, remain unknown. To examine changes in health care use during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in March and April of 2020 relative to March and April of 2019 and 2018, and to examine whether changes in use differ by patient's zip code-level race/ethnicity or income. This cross-sectional study analyzed health insurance claims for patients from all 50 US states who receive health insurance through their employers. Changes in use of preventive services, nonelective care, elective procedures, prescription drugs, in-person office visits, and telemedicine visits were examined during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 relative to existing trends in 2019 and 2018. Disparities in the association of the pandemic with health care use based on patient's zip code-level race and income were also examined. Data from 5.6, 6.4, and 6.8 million US individuals with employer-sponsored insurance in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively, were analyzed. Patient demographics were similar in all 3 years (mean [SD] age, 34.3 [18.6] years in 2018, 34.3 [18.5] years in 2019, and 34.5 [18.5] years in 2020); 50.0% women in 2018, 49.5% women in 2019, and 49.5% women in 2020). In March and April 2020, regression-adjusted use rate per 10 000 persons changed by -28.2 (95% CI, -30.5 to -25.9) and -64.5 (95% CI, -66.8 to -62.2) for colonoscopies; -149.1 (95% CI, -162.0 to -16.2) and -342.1 (95% CI, -355.0 to -329.2) for mammograms; -60.0 (95% CI, -63.3 to -54.7) and -118.1 (95% CI, -112.4 to -113.9) for hemoglobin A1c tests; -300.5 (95% CI, -346.5 to -254.5) and -369.0 (95% CI, -414.7 to -323.4) for child vaccines; -4.6 (95% CI, -5.3 to -3.9) and -10.9 (95% CI, -11.6 to -10.2) for musculoskeletal surgery; -1.1 (95% CI, -1.4 to -0.7) and -3.4 (95% CI, -3.8 to -3.0) for cataract surgery; -13.4 (95% CI, -14.6 to -12.2) and -31.4 (95% CI, -32.6 to -30.2) for magnetic resonance imaging; and -581.1 (95% CI, -612.9 to -549.3) and -1465 (95% CI, -1496 to -1433) for in-person office visits. Use of telemedicine services increased by 227.9 (95% CI, 221.7 to 234.1) per 10 000 persons and 641.6 (95% CI, 635.5 to 647.8) per 10 000 persons. Patients living in zip codes with lower-income or majority racial/ethnic minority populations experienced smaller reductions in in-person visits (≥80% racial/ethnic minority zip code: 200.0 per 10 000 [95% CI, 128.9-270.1]; 79%-21% racial/ethnic minority zip code: 54.2 per 10 000 [95% CI, 33.6-74.9]) but also had lower rates of adoption of telemedicine (≥80% racial/ethnic minority zip code: -71.6 per 10 000 [95% CI, -87.6 to -55.5]; 79%-21% racial/ethnic minority zip code: -15.1 per 10 000 [95% CI, -19.8 to -10.4]). In this cross-sectional study of a large US population with employer-sponsored insurance, the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with dramatic reductions in the use of preventive and elective care. Use of telemedicine increased rapidly but not enough to account for reductions in in-person primary care visits. Race and income disparities at the zip code level exist in use of telemedicine.