Explore the vast range of titles available.

Race and racism have become huge areas of study in the social sciences over the past two decades. However, whilst this has been reflected in the growing body of theoretical and empirically based work, surprisingly little has been published that explores the methodological and practical issues involved in researching race. In Researching Race and Racism Martin Bulmer and John Solomos have brought together contributions from some of the leading researchers in the field, using the benefit of their experience to explore the practical and ethical issues involved in doing research in this sometimes controversial, often heavily politicised field. This book will provide students and researchers - both new to the field and experienced alike - with an invaluable tool to help them find their way.

“A welcome and overdue contribution to the field. Identifying a need for an empirical guide to complement the abundant theoretical literature, this book combines a variety of practical avenues of advice with analytical sophistication, without losing any of the subject matter's complexities. The contextual chapters are well judged and informative, while readers will surely find the careful selection and very clear presentation of the case studies particularly useful in thinking through the projects from start to completion.”- Steve Garner, Open UniversityThis book offers a one stop guide to the meaning of racism, key studies in the field, core methodologies and an agenda for research for the future. Discussing the salient aspects of race and racism in contemporary society alongside methodological and practical considerations of qualitative research in the field, Researching Racism is not only an original textbook but also a crucial guide for anyone beginning their own research on racism.Based on Muzammil Quraishi and Rob Philburn's extensive background as researchers, supervisors and teachers, this book: offers a clear and accessible account of an interdisciplinary and complex topic; incorporates historical, legislative and international dimensions of race and racism; outlines and illustrates a range of qualitative research methods; provides case studies and engaging examples; includes a tool kit for researchers of racism.This is an indispensable guide for students wanting to research race and racism across the social sciences.

Graduate medical education (GME) on diversity, equity, and inclusion rarely teaches strategies for developing anti-racist mindsets and behaviors, and understanding of the impact of these programs and particular curricular components is lacking. To evaluate the format, content, and impact of a longitudinal anti-racism conference series (ARC) on resident physicians within an urban internal medicine program through a qualitative analysis, with the goal of informing the development and implementation of other evidence-based anti-racism curricula in graduate medical education (GME). The ARC consisted of eight mandatory, 60-min virtual conferences held between August 2020 and June 2021 within an internal medicine residency program's primary care track sub-group. The conference's content synthesized previous anti-racism curricula, scholarly readings, and practical experiences, and emphasized internal reflection and behavior change. Thirty internal medicine resident physicians and six faculty members. Seven voluntary, semi-structured, hour-long focus groups were conducted to document resident perspectives on the ARC's format, content, and impact of the curriculum on learner's professional and personal development. Constructivist grounded theory was used to analyze resident responses. In total, 17/30 (57%) residents participated in focus groups. Analysis of course format, content, and impact revealed the following: (1) The most valued aspect of the course's instructional format was its perceived psychological safety. (2) Residents desired course content with more outward action steps than were offered. (3) Residents noted personal and professional impact across three main domains: intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional. In this longitudinal GME internal medicine anti-racism curriculum, participants felt that the curriculum format provided safe spaces to engage with topics on systemic racism and patient care, but content lacked sufficient action-oriented strategies. The curriculum's impact was multi-dimensional and could be studied more deeply in the future through simulation or direct observation.

Despite growing interest in the health-related consequences of racially discriminatory institutional policies and practices, public health scholars have yet to reach a consensus on how to measure and analyze exposure to institutional racism. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the conceptualization, measurement, and analysis of institutional racism in the context of quantitative research on minority health and health disparities in the United States. We begin by providing definitions of key concepts (e.g., racialization, racism, racial inequity) and describing linkages between these ideas. Next, we discuss the hypothesized mechanisms that link exposure to institutional racism with health. We then provide a framework to advance empirical research on institutional racism and health, informed by a literature review that summarizes measures and analytic approaches used in previous studies. The framework addresses six considerations: (1) policy identification, (2) population of interest, (3) exposure measurement, (4) outcome measurement, (5) study design, and (6) analytic approach. Research utilizing the proposed framework will help inform structural interventions to promote minority health and reduce racial and ethnic health disparities.

Survey questions asking about taboo topics such as sexual activities, illegal behaviour such as social fraud, or unsocial attitudes such as racism, often generate inaccurate survey estimates which are distorted by social desirability bias. Due to self-presentation concerns, survey respondents underreport socially undesirable activities and overreport socially desirable ones. This article reviews theoretical explanations of socially motivated misreporting in sensitive surveys and provides an overview of the empirical evidence on the effectiveness of specific survey methods designed to encourage the respondents to answer more honestly. Besides psychological aspects, like a stable need for social approval and the preference for not getting involved into embarrassing social interactions, aspects of the survey design, the interviewer’s characteristics and the survey situation determine the occurrence and the degree of social desirability bias. The review shows that survey designers could generate more valid data by selecting appropriate data collection strategies that reduce respondents’ discomfort when answering to a sensitive question.

BackgroundExposures to structural racism has been identified as one of the leading risk factors for adverse maternal and infant health outcomes among Black women; yet current measures of structural racism do not fully account for inequities seen in adverse maternal and infant health outcomes between Black and white women and infants. In response, the purpose of this study was to conceptualize structural racism from the perspectives of Black women across the reproductive lifespan and its potential impact on adverse maternal and infant health outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a series of focus groups with 32 Black women across the reproductive lifespan (5 preconception, 13 pregnant, and 14 postpartum). Study criteria including self-identifying as Black, residing in Oakland or Fresno, California and representing one of three reproductive life tracks (preconception, pregnant, postpartum). We consulted with study participants and an expert advisory board to validate emergent domains of structural racism.ResultsNine domains of structural racism emerged from a ground theory constant comparative analysis: Negative Societal Views; Housing; Medical Care; Law Enforcement; Hidden Resources; Employment; Education, Community Infrastructure; and Policing Black Families.Conclusions for PracticeFindings from this study suggest that there is an interplay among structural racism, and social and structural determinants of health which has negative impacts on Black women’s sexual and reproductive health. Furthermore, findings from this study can be used to develop more comprehensive medical assessments and policies to address structural racism experienced by Black women across the reproductive lifespan.

Background Racism constitutes a barrier towards achieving equitable healthcare as documented in research showing unequal processes of delivering, accessing, and receiving healthcare across countries and healthcare indicators. This review summarizes studies examining how racism is discussed and produced in the process of delivering, accessing and receiving healthcare across various national contexts. Method The PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews were followed and databases were searched for peer reviewed empirical articles in English across national contexts. No starting date limitation was applied for this review. The end date was December 1, 2020. The review scoped 213 articles. The results were summarized, coded and thematically categorized in regards to the aim. Results The review yielded the following categories: healthcare users’ experiences of racism in healthcare; healthcare staff’s experiences of racism; healthcare staff’s racial attitudes and beliefs; effects of racism in healthcare on various treatment choices; healthcare staff’s reflections on racism in healthcare and; antiracist training in healthcare. Racialized minorities experience inadequate healthcare and being dismissed in healthcare interactions. Experiences of racism are associated with lack of trust and delay in seeking healthcare. Racialized minority healthcare staff experience racism in their workplace from healthcare users and colleagues and lack of organizational support in managing racism. Research on healthcare staff’s racial attitudes and beliefs demonstrate a range of negative stereotypes regarding racialized minority healthcare users who are viewed as difficult. Research on implicit racial bias illustrates that healthcare staff exhibit racial bias in favor of majority group. Healthcare staff’s racial bias may influence medical decisions negatively. Studies examining healthcare staff’s reflections on racism and antiracist training show that healthcare staff tend to construct healthcare as impartial and that healthcare staff do not readily discuss racism in their workplace. Conclusions The USA dominates the research. It is imperative that research covers other geo-political contexts. Research on racism in healthcare is mainly descriptive, atheoretical, uses racial categories uncritically and tends to ignore racialization processes making it difficult to conceptualize racism. Sociological research on racism could inform research on racism as it theoretically explains racism’s structural embeddedness, which could aid in tackling racism to provide good quality care.

COVID-19 vaccine development has advanced at lighting speed. Research that would normally require years has been completed in months. As a result of this unprecedented effort, two vaccine candidates, mRNA-1273 (Moderna, Cambridge, MA) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer, New York, NY), have been found to be safe and more than 90% effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 shortly after vaccination. These vaccines are extremely promising and will eventually be distributed widely. Unfortunately, as the science of vaccine development has swiftly progressed, the equally important science of community engagement, which should guide the establishment of mutually beneficial partnerships and promote eventual vaccine uptake, has lagged behind. Research methods focused on the development of effective public health interventions place communities- groups with shared culture, norms, beliefs, or language-at their core and emphasize the primacy of community ownership as essential for uptake and sustainability.1 Yet, communities of color (i.e., Black, Latinx, and Indigenous communities), who remain at highest risk for infection, have been peripheral, not central actors in the pursuit of COVID-19 vaccines. Instead, the tripartite relationship between industry, government, and academia has dominated the research enterprise related to COVID-19.The peripheral position of community has been evident since early in vaccine development. Notably, initial trial recruitment consisted of short-term community outreach, and more detailed plans for longer-term community engagement to support enrollment and eventual vaccine uptake commenced late in phase III trials. Such a critical oversight may be the Achilles' heel of this unprecedented effort. Deeply rooted mistrust bred by centuries of well-documented, abusive medical experimentation and ongoing structural racism impedes racially and ethnically diverse individuals' participation in clinical trials and threatens the uptake of future COVID-19 vaccines, particularly among Black individuals.

Despite persistent disparities in maternity care outcomes, there are limited resources to guide clinical practice and clinician behavior to dismantle biased practices and beliefs, structural and institutional racism, and the policies that perpetuate racism. Focus groups and interviews were held in communities in the United States identified as having higher density of Black births. Focus group and interview themes and codes illuminated Black birthing individual’s experience with labor and delivery in the hospital setting. Using an iterative process to refine and incorporate qualitative themes, we created a framework in close collaboration with birth equity stakeholders. This is an actionable, cyclical framework for training on anti-racist maternity care. The Cycle to Respectful Care acknowledges the development and perpetuation of biased healthcare delivery, while providing a solution for dismantling healthcare providers’ socialization that results in biased and discriminatory care. The Cycle to Respectful Care is an actionable tool to liberate patients, by way of their healthcare providers, from biased practices and beliefs, structural and institutional racism, and the policies that perpetuate racism.

Background In Canada, there is longstanding evidence of health inequities for racialized groups. The purpose of this study is to understand the effect of current health care policies and practices on racial/ethnic groups and in particular racialized groups at the level of the individual in Toronto’s health care system. Methods This study used a semi-qualitative study design: concept mapping. A purposive sampling strategy was used to recruit participants. Health care users and health care providers from Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area participated in all four concept mapping activities. The sample sizes varied according to the activity. For the rating activity, 41 racialized health care users, 23 non-racialized health care users and 11 health care providers completed this activity. The data analysis was completed using the concept systems software. Results Participants generated 35 unique statements of ways in which patients feel disrespect or mistreatment when receiving health care. These statements were grouped into five clusters: ‘Racial/ethnic and class discrimination’, ‘Dehumanizing the patient’, ‘Negligent communication’, ‘Professional misconduct’, and ‘Unequal access to health and health services’. Two distinct conceptual regions were identified: ‘Viewed as inferior’ and ‘Unequal medical access’. From the rating activity, racialized health care users reported ‘race’/ethnic based discrimination or everyday racism as largely contributing to the challenges experienced when receiving health care; statements rated high for action/change include ‘when the health care provider does not complete a proper assessment’, ‘when the patient’s symptoms are ignored or not taken seriously’, ‘and ‘when the health care provider belittles or talks down to the patient’. Conclusions Our study identifies how racialized health care users experience everyday racism when receiving health care and this is important to consider in the development of future research and interventions aimed at addressing institutional racism in the health care setting. To support the elimination of institutional racism, anti-racist policies are needed to move beyond cultural competence polices and towards addressing the centrality of unequal power social relations and everyday racism in the health care system.