Barely Tweeting and Rarely About Racism: Assessing US State Health Department Twitter Use During the COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout.

Introduction: The general public was discussing racism and potential inequities in COVID-19 vaccinations among African Americans on Twitter before the first COVID-19 vaccine received emergency use authorization, but it is unclear how US state health departments (SHDs) were using Twitter to address the inequities. This study examines the frequency, content and timing of SHD tweets during the US rollout of the first SARS Co-V2 vaccine. Methods: This was a prospective study of tweets posted from the official Twitter accounts of each of the 50 US SHDs and the DC health department from October 19, 2020 to February 28, 2021. We retrieved the content and metadata of 100% of their tweets; calculated frequencies and proportions of tweets containing key terms related to COVID-19 vaccines, equity and racism; stratified the data by region; and charted longitudinal trends. Results: Overall, SHDs tweeted infrequently, and rarely tweeted about inequities, mistrust or racism. Though 55.48% of all SHD tweets were about COVID-19, hardly any tweets contained the terms: race/ethnicity (1.20%); equity (1.09); mistrust (.59%); or racism (.06%). Similar patterns existed among vaccination-related tweets, which accounted for 24.38% of all tweets. Only 21.64% of vaccination-related tweets containing any race/ethnicity, equity, mistrust, or racism terms were posted prior to the first Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Those about African Americans (70.45%) were posted ≥8 weeks after EUA. Conclusions: Concerns about racism and inequities in COVID-19 vaccination continue on Twitter, but SHDs rarely tweet about them. This strikes a worrisome chord of disconnection from the science linking health inequities to racism.

Integrated Methods for Applying Critical Race Theory to Qualitative COVID-19 Equity Research.

Background: Racism persists, underscoring the need to rapidly document the perspectives and experiences of Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) groups as well as marginalized populations (eg, formerly incarcerated people) during pandemics. Objective: This methods paper offers a model for using Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP) and related critical methodologies (ie, feminist and decolonizing methods) to inform the conceptualization, methods, and dissemination of qualitative research undertaken in response to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. Sample: Using purposive snowball sampling, we identified organizations involved with health equity and social justice advocacy among BIPOC and socially marginalized populations. Focus group participants (N=63) included community members, organizers, activists, and health workers. Design: We conducted topic-specific (eg, reproductive justice) and population-specific (eg, Asian and Pacific Islander) focus groups (N=16 focus groups) in rapid succession using Zoom software. Methods: A self-reflexive, iterative praxis guided theorization, data collection and analysis. We obtained community input on study design, the semi-structured discussion guide, ethical considerations and dissemination. Applying PHCRP, we assessed our assumptions iteratively. We transcribed each interview verbatim, de-identified the data, then used two distinct qualitative techniques to code and analyze them: thematic analysis to identify unifying concepts that recur across focus groups and narrative analysis to keep each participant's story intact. Results: The praxis facilitated relationship-building with partners and supported the iterative assessment of assumptions. Logistical constraints included difficulty ensuring the confidentiality of virtual discussions. Conclusions: These novel approaches provide an effective model for community-engaged qualitative research during a pandemic.

Race, ancestry, and genetic risk for kidney failure.

In a retrospective analysis of over 62,000 Black and non-Black participants from eight United States cohorts, Gutiérrez et al.1 examined estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations to assess racial differences in kidney failure requiring replacement therapy and in mortality across different equations.

Using COVID-19 Surveillance Systems to Identify and Monitor Disparities: Best Practices and Recommendations.

Inadequate attention to racial health equity is a common challenge to effective, reliable monitoring and mitigation of COVID-19 disparities. Efforts to monitor and mitigate COVID-19 disparities continue to be hampered by inadequacies in how surveillance systems collect, tabulate, and report COVID-19-related outcomes. We conducted environmental scans of existing public health surveillance systems and reporting standards, literature reviews, focus groups with surveillance experts, and consultations with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and an expert panel on surveillance to identify and explore strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in how existing systems monitor COVID-19 and their implications for addressing disparities in related outcomes. We present recommendations based on these reviews and propose a core minimum set of health indicators and best-practice standards for reporting these indicators by COVID-19 surveillance systems to monitor racial/ethnic and other disparities in the pandemic. These recommendations are relevant to monitoring disparities in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and may inform monitoring of future epidemics. This discussion is part of an effort by Project REFOCUS to develop syndemic surveillance systems for monitoring the intersecting pandemics of COVID-19 and racism.

Health inequities and the inappropriate use of race in nephrology.

Chronic kidney disease is an important clinical condition beset with racial and ethnic disparities that are associated with social inequities. Many medical schools and health centres across the USA have raised concerns about the use of race - a socio-political construct that mediates the effect of structural racism - as a fixed, measurable biological variable in the assessment of kidney disease. We discuss the role of race and racism in medicine and outline many of the concerns that have been raised by the medical and social justice communities regarding the use of race in estimated glomerular filtration rate equations, including its relationship with structural racism and racial inequities. Although race can be used to identify populations who experience racism and subsequent differential treatment, ignoring the biological and social heterogeneity within any racial group and inferring innate individual-level attributes is methodologically flawed. Therefore, although more accurate measures for estimating kidney function are under investigation, we support the use of biomarkers for determining estimated glomerular filtration rate without adjustments for race. Clinicians have a duty to recognize and elucidate the nuances of racism and its effects on health and disease. Otherwise, we risk perpetuating historical racist concepts in medicine that exacerbate health inequities and impact marginalized patient populations.

Use of Race in Kidney Research and Medicine: Concepts, Principles, and Practice.

Black Americans and other racially and ethnically minoritized individuals are disproportionately burdened by higher morbidity and mortality from kidney disease when compared with their White peers. Yet, kidney researchers and clinicians have struggled to fully explain or rectify causes of these inequalities. Many studies have sought to identify hypothesized genetic and/or ancestral origins of biologic or behavioral deficits as singular explanations for racial and ethnic inequalities in kidney health. However, these approaches reinforce essentialist beliefs that racial groups are inherently biologically and behaviorally different. These approaches also often conflate the complex interactions of individual-level biologic differences with aggregated population-level disparities that are due to structural racism (i.e., sociopolitical policies and practices that created and perpetuate harmful health outcomes through inequities of opportunities and resources). We review foundational misconceptions about race, racism, genetics, and ancestry that shape research and clinical practice with a focus on kidney disease and related health outcomes. We also provide recommendations on how to embed key equity-enhancing concepts, terms, and principles into research, clinical practice, and medical publishing standards.

Adequacy of Existing Surveillance Systems to Monitor Racism, Social Stigma and COVID Inequities: A Detailed Assessment and Recommendations.

The populations impacted most by COVID are also impacted by racism and related social stigma; however, traditional surveillance tools may not capture the intersectionality of these relationships. We conducted a detailed assessment of diverse surveillance systems and databases to identify characteristics, constraints and best practices that might inform the development of a novel COVID surveillance system that achieves these aims. We used subject area expertise, an expert panel and CDC guidance to generate an initial list of N > 50 existing surveillance systems as of 29 October 2020, and systematically excluded those not advancing the project aims. This yielded a final reduced group (n = 10) of COVID surveillance systems (n = 3), other public health systems (4) and systems tracking racism and/or social stigma (n = 3, which we evaluated by using CDC evaluation criteria and Critical Race Theory. Overall, the most important contribution of COVID-19 surveillance systems is their real-time (e.g., daily) or near-real-time (e.g., weekly) reporting; however, they are severely constrained by the lack of complete data on race/ethnicity, making it difficult to monitor racial/ethnic inequities. Other public health systems have validated measures of psychosocial and behavioral factors and some racism or stigma-related factors but lack the timeliness needed in a pandemic. Systems that monitor racism report historical data on, for instance, hate crimes, but do not capture current patterns, and it is unclear how representativeness the findings are. Though existing surveillance systems offer important strengths for monitoring health conditions or racism and related stigma, new surveillance strategies are needed to monitor their intersecting relationships more rigorously.

Racial Disparities in Rheumatology Through the Lens of Critical Race Theory.

According to critical race theory (CRT), racism is ubiquitous in society. In the field of medicine, systems of racism are subtly interwoven with patient care, medical education, and medical research. Public health critical race praxis (PHCRP) is a tool that allows researchers to apply CRT to research. This article discusses the application of CRT and PHCRP to 3 race-related misconceptions in rheumatology: (1) giant cell arteritis is rare in non-White populations; (2) Black patients are less likely to undergo knee replacement because of patient preference; and (3) HLA-B*5801 screening should only be performed for patients of Asian descent.

Health Implications of Housing Assignments for Incarcerated Transgender Women.

Transgender women (i.e., persons who were assigned male sex at birth but who live and identify as female) experience forms of discrimination that limit their access to stable housing and contribute to high rates of incarceration; once incarcerated, the approaches used to assign them housing within the jail or prison place them at risk for abuse, rape, and other outcomes. Yet, a paucity of studies explores the implications of carceral housing assignments for transgender women.Whether the approaches used to assign housing in jails and prisons violate the rights of incarcerated transgender persons has been argued before the US federal courts under Section 1983 of the US Constitution, which allows persons who were raped while incarcerated to claim a violation of their Eighth Amendment rights.Reforms and policy recommendations have been attempted; however, the results have been mixed and the public health implications have received limited attention.

Commentary: Just What is Critical Race Theory and What's it Doing in a Progressive Field like Public Health?

Gloria Ladson-Billings cautiously promotes the use of Critical Race Theory (CRT) to address racism's contribution to educational disparities. Nearly a decade ago, we issued a similar call to the multidisciplinary field of public health. Public health touts its progressive roots and focus on equity, but do those efforts draw on CRT? To answer this question, we define CRT, describe its origin in the field of law, and review the ways its use has grown in the field of public health. Public health interventions and policies rely heavily on evidence; therefore, we re-introduce the semi-structured research method we developed to facilitate empirical application of CRT, ie, the Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP).

Editorial: Critical Race Theory - We Are all Others.

Over the past two years, the persistence of racism in the United States has been particularly pronounced in the policies and actions of the administration of President Donald J. Trump; however, the structure of the United States has been racialized since its inception. This supplement of Ethnicity & Disease uses Critical Race Theory (CRT) to explore several implications for public health and public health research. We intend for it to spark conversations in the classroom and among researchers on how racial phenomena operate and how we as a field can address racism.

Anti-Racism Methods for Big Data Research: Lessons Learned from the HIV Testing, Linkage, & Retention in Care (HIV TLR) Study.

Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP) contributes three functional elements to health equity studies: a race conscious orientation; an antiracism lexicon based on Critical Race Theory (CRT); and an integrated, reflexive approach. Few big data studies employ all three functional elements. Therefore, this article describes the application of PHCRP to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Testing, Linkage and Retention in care (HIV TLR) study (N=3,476,741), which connects multiple large datasets to electronic medical records to examine contextual determinants of racial/ethnic disparities in HIV care continuum outcomes in southern California. As HIV TLR demonstrates, PHCRP's innovative tools and strategies help big data research maintain fidelity to CRT.

Endometrial cancer disparities: a race-conscious critique of the literature.

Racial disparities in endometrial cancer are stark and have increased over the past decade. While the disparities are well documented, intervention work to address the mortality gap is nonexistent. This review critiques how race has been conceptualized to explain the causes of endometrial cancer disparities, assesses gaps in knowledge production, and proposes new research priorities. Using public health critical race praxis, a research approach for examining racial disparities and knowledge production processes, we reviewed the endometrial cancer disparities literature from 1995 through 2016. Using systematic search methods, 133 unique records were identified and 48 studies critiqued. We found that a narrow definition of race as a purely biological construct is common throughout the literature. This appears to result in an underemphasis on the role of modifiable, nonbiological contributors to racial disparities and a lack of follow-up work to address these contributors. Key knowledge gaps identified were the role of health care systems in early diagnosis, a lack of intervention studies to address persistent treatment inequity by race, and the near absence of qualitative work to understand the perspectives of Black women diagnosed with endometrial cancer. We conclude with an iterative demonstration of the public health critical race praxis and suggest new routes of inquiry to broaden the scope of research priorities to understand and improve the outcomes of Black women with endometrial cancer.

Effects of a Laboratory Health Information Exchange Intervention on Antiretroviral Therapy Use, Viral Suppression, and Racial/Ethnic Disparities.

BACKGROUND: Although antiretroviral therapy (ART) is available to treat HIV+ persons and prevent transmission, ineffective delivery of care may delay ART use, impede viral suppression (VS), and contribute to racial/ethnic disparities along the continuum of care. This study tested the effects of a bi-directional laboratory health information exchange (LHIE) intervention on each of these outcomes. METHODS: We used a quasi-experimental, interrupted time-series design to examine whether the LHIE intervention improved ART use and VS, and reduced racial/ethnic disparities in these outcomes among HIV+ patients (N = 1181) in a comprehensive HIV/AIDS clinic in Southern California. Main outcome measures were ART pharmacy fill and HIV viral load laboratory data extracted from the medical records over 3 years. Race/ethnicity and an indicator for the intervention (after vs. before) were the main predictors. The analysis involved 3-stage, multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Overall, the intervention predicted greater odds of ART use (odds ratio [OR] = 2.50; 95% confidence interval: 2.29 to 2.73; P < 0.001) and VS (OR = 1.12; 95% confidence interval: 1.04 to 1.21; P < 0.05) in the final models that included sociodemographic, behavioral, and clinical covariates. Before the intervention, there were significant black/white disparities in ART use OR = 0.75 (0.58-0.98; P = 0.04) and VS OR = 0.75 (0.61-0.92; P = 0.001). After the intervention, the black/white disparities decreased after adjusting for sociodemographics and the number of HIV care visits, and Latinos had greater odds than whites of ART use and VS, adjusting for covariates. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention improved overall ART treatment and VS, and reduced black/white disparities. LHIE interventions may hold promise if implemented among similar patients.

Racial and ethnic residential segregation and access to health care in rural areas.

This study examined the relationship between racial/ethnic residential segregation and access to health care in rural areas. Data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey were merged with the American Community Survey and the Area Health Resources Files. Segregation was operationalized using the isolation index separately for African Americans and Hispanics. Multi-level logistic regression with random intercepts estimated four outcomes. In rural areas, segregation contributed to worse access to a usual source of health care but higher reports of health care needs being met among African Americans (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]: 1.42, CI: 0.96-2.10) and Hispanics (AOR: 1.25, CI: 1.05-1.49). By broadening the spatial scale of segregation beyond urban areas, findings showed the complex interaction between social and spatial factors in rural areas.