An intersectionality framework for identifying relevant covariates in health equity research.

Introduction: Health equity research uses impact evaluations to estimate the effectiveness of new interventions that aim to mitigate health inequities. Health inequities are influenced by many experiential factors and failure of research to account for such experiential factors and their potential interactions may jeopardize findings and lead to promoted methods that may unintentionally sustain or even worsen the targeted health inequity. Thus, it is imperative that health equity impact evaluations identify and include variables related to the circumstances, conditions, and experiences of the sample being studied in analyses. In this review, we promote intersectionality as a conceptual framework for brainstorming important yet often overlooked covariates in health equity related impact evaluations. Methods: We briefly review and define concepts and terminology relevant to health equity, then detail four domains of experiential factors that often intersect in ways that may obscure findings: Biological, Social, Environmental, and Economic. Results: We provide examples of the framework's application to lupus-related research and examples of covariates used in our own health equity impact evaluations with minority patients who have lupus. Discussion: Applying an intersectionality framework during covariate selection is an important component to actualizing precision prevention. While we do not provide an exhaustive list, our aim is to provide a springboard for brainstorming meaningful covariates for health equity evaluation that may further help unveil sustainable solutions to persisting health inequities.

[A top-down path to promote environmental justice in a contaminated area. The experience with the community of Porto Torres (Sardinia, Italy)]. / Un percorso top-down di promozione della giustizia ambientale in un sito contaminato. L'esperienza con la comunità di Porto Torres.

Nowadays, in Italy, researchers from various disciplines and institutions are referring to environmental justice to promote health equity in relation to environmental risks and benefits. This presents an opportunity for the convergence of bottom-up and top-down perspectives, which differ in nature, to advance environmental justice at the local level. This contribution presents the experience of researchers from the Italian National Institute of Health in the contaminated area of Porto Torres (Sardinia). The experience began with the development of study activities aimed at describing the health profile of the population residing in Porto Torres. These activities embraced the requests of the local community and included interactions with local institutional and social actors. The study activities were designed with a focus on environmental justice, which requires an understanding of the local context and of its history. The contribution describes the various stages that led from the development of the study to the engagement with local institutional and social actors, communication of study results, and participation in local initiatives on environmental justice. Finally, the text proposes some considerations on how researchers from a central institution can develop and conduct study activities to promote environmental justice at the local level.

An evaluation of the quality, suitability and impact on equity of clinical practice guidelines relevant to preterm birth for use in Aotearoa New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is a leading cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality and a defining event for pregnant people, infants, and whanau (extended families). Recommendations have been made for a national preterm birth prevention initiative focusing on equity in Aotearoa New Zealand, including the development of a national best practice guide. An understanding of the number and quality of guidelines, and consideration of their suitability and impact on equity is required. METHODS: Guidelines were identified through a systematic literature search, search of professional bodies websites, and invitation to regional health services in Aotearoa New Zealand. Obstetric and midwifery clinical directors were invited to report on guideline use. Identified guidelines were appraised by a 23-member trans-disciplinary Review Panel; quantitatively using the AGREE-II instrument and qualitatively using modified ADAPTE questions. The quality of guidelines available but not in use was compared against those in current use, and by health services by level of maternity and neonatal care. Major themes affecting implementation and impact on equity were identified using Braun and Clarke methodology. RESULTS: A total of 235 guidelines were included for appraisal. Guidelines available but not in use by regional health services scored higher in quality than guidelines in current use (median domain score Rigour and Development 47.5 versus 18.8, p < 0.001, median domain score Overall Assessment 62.5 versus 44.4, p < 0.001). Guidelines in use by regional health services with tertiary maternity and neonatal services had higher median AGREE II scores in several domains, than those with secondary level services (median domain score Overall Assessment 50.0 versus 37.5, p < 0.001). Groups identified by the Review Panel as experiencing the greatest constraints and limitations to guideline implementation were rural, provincial, low socioeconomic, Maori, and Pacific populations. Identified themes to improve equity included a targeted approach to groups experiencing the least advantage; a culturally considered approach; nationally consistent guidance; and improved funding to support implementation of guideline recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: We have systematically identified and assessed guidelines on preterm birth. High-quality guidelines will inform a national best practice guide for use in Taonga Tuku Iho, a knowledge translation project for equity in preterm birth care and outcomes in Aotearoa.

Nurse informaticists' role in promoting health equity.

ABSTRACT: Nurse informaticists (NIs) play a pivotal role in addressing health-related social needs through integrating technology into electronic health records. NIs navigate regulatory landscapes, emphasizing screening for social determinants of health during hospital encounters. This article underscores NIs' strategic contributions to optimizing data collection, supporting health equity, and utilizing innovative technologies to bridge gaps in healthcare outcomes.

Perspective: Nutrition Health Disparities Framework: A Model to Advance Health Equity.

Disparities in nutrition, such as poor diet quality and inadequate nutrient intake, arise from multiple factors and are related to adverse health outcomes such as obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. The aim of the current perspective is to present a nutrition-centric socioecological framework that delineates determinants and factors that contribute to diet and nutrition-related disparities among disadvantaged populations. The Nutrition Health Disparities Framework (NHDF) describes the domains (biological, behavioral, physical/built environment, sociocultural environment, and healthcare system) that influence nutrition-related health disparities through the lens of each level of influence (that is, individual, interpersonal, community, and societal). On the basis of the scientific literature, the authors engaged in consensus decision making in selecting nutrition-related determinants of health within each domain and socioecological level when creating the NHDF. The framework identifies how neighborhood food availability and access (individual/built environment) intersect with cultural norms and practices (interpersonal/sociocultural environment) to influence dietary behaviors, exposures, and risk of diet-related diseases. In addition, the NHDF shows how factors such as genetic predisposition (individual/biology), family dietary practices (interpersonal/behavioral), and food marketing policies (societal) may impact the consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages and increase chronic disease risk. Family and peer norms (interpersonal/behavior) related to breastfeeding and early childhood nutrition interact with resource-poor environments such as lack of access to preventive healthcare settings (societal/healthcare system) and low usage of federal nutrition programs (societal/behavioral), which may increase risk of poor nutrition during childhood and food insecurity. The NHDF describes the synergistic interrelationships among factors at different levels of the socioecological model that influence nutrition-related outcomes and exacerbate health disparities. The framework is a useful resource for nutrition researchers, practitioners, food industry leaders, and policymakers interested in improving diet-related health outcomes and promoting health equity in diverse populations.

How attitudes of state and community leaders regarding health equity and social determinants of health are associated with behavioral intentions to improve population health.

A critical driver of population health, well-being, and equity is making health a shared value, or the belief that health is a priority for oneself and one's community. For people in positions of influence, attitudes regarding their organization's perspective may result in decisions that advance health equity or reinforce inequities. Yet despite the potential role of leaders in influencing health and well-being, little is known about their attitudes regarding their organization's perspective on what shapes health, or how their attitudes translate into actions that improve population health. The objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to understand leaders' attitudes with regard to their organization's perspective on population health and (2) to identify the attitudes associated with leaders' perspectives regarding their organization's intention to engage in behaviors that advance population health. We designed a survey instrument grounded in the Theory of Planned Behavior and fielded the survey to 18,367 state and community leaders across all 50 U.S. states, 325 U.S. cities, and nine sectors from fall 2020 until spring 2022. We received surveys from 5,450 leaders, yielding a 32 percent response rate. Survey respondents viewed social determinants of health and health equity as important factors influencing population health. Additionally, two attitudes were most associated with leaders' intentions to promote population health-"self-efficacy" (a leader's confidence in taking action to promote health for all) and "behaviors valued by important others" (how much certain groups want the organization to take action that promotes health for all). Efforts to improve population health through leaders should focus on supporting leaders' self-efficacy and on increasing leaders' perceptions regarding behaviors valued by important others. Governmental entities and funders can use these data to support leaders' efforts in improving population health, well-being, and equity.

Rural-urban inequalities in health care utilization in Bhutan: a decomposition analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: On the trajectory towards universal health coverage in Bhutan, health equity requires policy attention as significant disparities exist between urban and rural health outcomes. This paper examines health services utilization patterns, inequalities and their socio-economic determinants in rural and urban areas and decomposes the factors behind these differences. METHODS: We used the Bhutan Living Standard Survey 2017 to profile health services utilization patterns and equalities. We employed two different decomposition analyses: decomposition of mean differences in utilization using the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition framework and differences in the income-related distribution in utilization using recentered influence function regressions between rural and urban areas. RESULTS: Significant differences exist in the type of outpatient services used by the rural and urban population groups, with those living in rural areas having 3.4 times higher odds of using primary health centers compared to outpatient hospital care. We find that the use of primary health care is pro-poor and that outpatient hospital resources is concentrated among the more affluent section of the population, with this observed inequality consistent across settings but more severe in rural areas. The rural-urban gap in utilization is primarily driven by income and residence in the eastern region, while income-related inequality in utilization is influenced, aside from income, by residence in the central region, household size, and marriage and employment status of the household head. We do not find evidence of significant mean differences in overall utilization or inequality in utilization of inpatient health care services. CONCLUSIONS: While the differences in average contacts with health services are insignificant, there are prominent differences in the level of services availed and the associated inequality among rural and urban settings in Bhutan. Besides, while there are obvious overlaps, factors influencing income-related inequality are not necessarily the same as those driving the utilization gaps. Cognizance of these differences may lead to better informed, targeted, and potentially more effective future research and policies for universal health coverage.

The cost of inaction on health equity and its social determinants.

Rising levels of inflation, debt and macrofiscal tightening are putting expenditures on the social sectors including health under immense scrutiny. Already, there are worrying signs of reductions in social sector investments. However, even before the pandemic, evidence showed the significant returns on investments in health equity and its social determinants. Emerging data and trends show that these potential returns have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic - investments in social determinants can mitigate widespread reductions in human capital and the increasing likelihood of costly syndemics, while promoting access to healthcare innovations that have thus far been inequitably distributed. Therefore, we argue that, despite immediate fiscal pressures, this is exactly the time to invest in health equity and its broader social determinants, as the returns on such investments have never been greater.

Household income and health-related quality of life in children receiving treatment for acute myeloid leukemia: Potential impact of selection bias in health equity research.

OBJECTIVE: Examine the influence of household income on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among children with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data prospectively collected from pediatric patients receiving treatment for AML at 14 hospitals across the United States. EXPOSURE: Household income was self-reported on a demographic survey. The examined mediators included the acuity of presentation and treatment toxicity. OUTCOME: Caregiver proxy reported assessment of patient HRQOL from the Peds QL 4.0 survey. RESULT: Children with AML (n = 131) and caregivers were prospectively enrolled to complete PedsQL assessments. HRQOL scores were better for patients in the lowest versus highest income category (mean ± SD: 76.0 ± 14 household income <$25,000 vs. 59.9 ± 17 income ≥$75,000; adjusted mean difference: 11.2, 95% CI: 2.2-20.2). Seven percent of enrolled patients presented with high acuity (ICU-level care in the first 72 h), and 16% had high toxicity (any ICU-level care); there were no identifiable differences by income, refuting mediating roles in the association between income and HRQOL. Enrolled patients were less likely to be Black/African American (9.9% vs. 22.2%), more likely to be privately insured (50.4% vs. 40.7%), and more likely to have been treated on a clinical trial (26.7% vs. 18.5%) compared to eligible unenrolled patients not enrolled. Evaluations of potential selection bias on the association between income and HRQOL suggested differences in HRQOL may be smaller than observed or even in the opposing direction. CONCLUSIONS: While primary analyses suggested lower household income was associated with superior HRQOL, differential participation may have biased these results. Future studies should partner with patients/families to identify strategies for equitable participation in clinical research.

Storylines of family medicine X: standing up for diversity, equity and inclusion.

Storylines of Family Medicine is a 12-part series of thematically linked mini-essays with accompanying illustrations that explore the many dimensions of family medicine as interpreted by individual family physicians and medical educators in the USA and elsewhere around the world. In 'X: standing up for diversity, equity and inclusion', authors address the following themes: 'The power of diversity-why inclusivity is essential to equity in healthcare', 'Medical education for whom?', 'Growing a diverse and inclusive workforce', 'Therapeutic judo-an inclusive approach to patient care', 'Global family medicine-seeing the world "upside down"', 'The inverse care law', 'Social determinants of health as a lens for care', 'Why family physicians should care about human rights' and 'Toward health equity-the opportunome'. May the essays that follow inspire readers to promote change.

Governance for planetary health equity-the Planetary Health Equity Hothouse project.

BACKGROUND: Planetary health equity (PHE) is defined here as equitable good health in a stable Earth system. PHE is arguably in crisis. Human-made climate change is damaging global populations through hotter temperatures, wildfires, and more severe and frequent storms, flooding, and landslides. A tsunami of health inequities will result from this, as pre-existing health conditions and inequities in living and working conditions ensure that socially disadvantaged groups and people in low-income and middle-income countries are disproportionately affected by climate change. Despite evidence of these massive challenges and multiple calls to action, why has there been so little effective remedial action? And more importantly, how can we overcome this failure? To answer these questions, this panel discusses new research for understanding the conditions that enable coherent governance to improve planetary health equity outcomes. METHODS: The panel draws on emerging research from the Planetary Health Equity Hothouse. With perspectives from political economy, public health, policy studies, and systems science, we present new conceptual thinking and empirics around the complexities, dynamics, and trajectories of the global consumptogenic system in the 21st century, with a focus on the intersections between climate change and social and health inequities. The research examines mechanisms via which the global political economy creates planetary health inequities; identifies policy that optimises the climate, social, and health equity outcomes of mitigation actions; and discusses how governance for planetary health equity must evolve into the future, focusing on the structural, institutional, and ideational factors that advance action to promote PHE outcomes. FINDINGS: The global consumptogenic system of institutions, actors, norms, policies, and commercial activities that incentivise excessive production and consumption of fossil fuel-reliant goods and services with negative environmental, social, and health effects lies at the heart of the PHE crisis. Using network analysis, we show that the global PHE governance architecture is highly centralised and dominated by economic governance organisations. We also discuss a new Planetary Health Equity Impact Assessment tool to assess the PHE effects of existing policy and business practices within the consumptogenic system. An initial assessment of the mitigation sections of national governments' Nationally Determined Contribution reports to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change shows a dominance of economic language and issues. This highlights a missed opportunity for mitigation policy to be inclusive of social and health matters. Finally, we present new conceptual understandings of multilevel governance coherence and relevant strategies to advance PHE focused action. INTERPRETATION: The major contribution from research on governance for planetary health equity lies in detailing the what, who, and how of effective governance that advances health, social equity, and the environment in an interconnected way, helping to shift institutional norms and behaviours towards principles of fairness, sustainability, and human wellbeing. Crucially, it provides strategies for socially oriented actors, including governments, civil society, and international organisations to change the consumptogenic system and advance action for PHE. FUNDING: Australian Research Council.

Disparities in Teleneurology Use in Medicaid Beneficiaries With Epilepsy by Practice Setting: Promoting Health Equity in Academic Centers.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medicaid beneficiaries in many American academic medical centers can receive care in a separate facility than those not covered by Medicaid. We aimed to identify possible disparities in care by evaluating the association between facility type (integrated faculty practice or Medicaid-only outpatient clinic) and telehealth utilization in people with epilepsy. METHODS: We performed retrospective analyses using structured data from the Mount Sinai Health System electronic medical record data from January 2003 to August 2021. We identified people of all ages with epilepsy who were followed by an epileptologist after January 3, 2018, using a validated ICD-9-CM/10-CM coded case definition. We evaluated associations between practice setting and telehealth utilization, an outcome measure that captures the evolving delivery of neurologic care in a post-coronavirus disease 2019 era, using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 4,586 people with epilepsy seen by an epileptologist, including Medicaid beneficiaries in the Medicaid outpatient clinic (N = 387), Medicaid beneficiaries in the faculty practice after integration (N = 723), and non-Medicaid beneficiaries (N = 3,476). Patients not insured by Medicaid were significantly older (average age 40 years vs 29 in persons seen in Medicaid-only outpatient clinic and 28.5 in persons insured with Medicaid seen in faculty practice [p < 0.0001]). Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to have drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), with 51.94% of people seen in Medicaid-only outpatient clinic, 41.63% of Medicaid beneficiaries seen in faculty practice, and 37.2% of non-Medicaid beneficiaries having DRE (p < 0.0001). Medicaid outpatient clinic patients were less likely to have telehealth visits (phone or video); 81.65% of patients in the Medicaid outpatient clinic having no telehealth visits vs 71.78% of Medicaid beneficiaries in the faculty practice and 70.89% of non-Medicaid beneficiaries (p < 0.0001). In an adjusted logistic regression analysis, Medicaid beneficiaries had lower odds (0.61; 95% CI 0.46-0.81) of using teleneurology compared with all patients seen in faculty practice (p = 0.0005). DISCUSSION: Compared with the Medicaid-only outpatient clinic, we found higher telehealth utilization in the integrated faculty practice with no difference by insurance status (Medicaid vs other). Integrated care may be associated with better health care delivery in people with epilepsy; thus, future research should examine its impact on other epilepsy-related outcomes.

Building evidence to advance health equity: a systematic review on care-related outcomes for older, minoritised populations in long-term care homes.

BACKGROUND: Advancing health equity requires more contextualised evidence. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise published evidence using an existing framework on the origins of health disparities and determine care-related outcome disparities for residents of long-term care, comparing minoritised populations to the context-specific dominant population. DESIGN: Systematic review. SUBJECTS: Residents of 24-hour long-term care homes. METHODS: The protocol was registered a priori with PROSPERO (CRD42021269489). Literature published between 1 January 2000 and 26 September 2021, was searched, including studies comparing baseline characteristics and outcomes in minoritised versus dominant populations. Dual screening, two-reviewer verification for extraction, and risk of bias assessments were conducted to ensure rigour. Studies were synthesized using a conceptual framework to contextualise evidence according to multi-level factors contributing to the development of care disparities. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 34 included studies demonstrated disparities in care outcomes for minoritised groups compared to majority groups. Thirty-one studies observed differences in individual-level characteristics (e.g. age, education, underlying conditions) upon entry to homes, with several outcome disparities (e.g. restraint use, number of medications) present at baseline and remaining or worsening over time. Significant gaps in evidence were identified, particularly an absence of literature on provider information and evidence on the experience of intersecting minority identities that contribute to care-related outcome disparities in long-term care. CONCLUSION: This review found differences in minoritised populations' care-related outcomes. The findings provide guidance for future health equity policy and research-supporting diverse and intersectional capacity building in long-term care.

Global learning: A post-COVID-19 approach to advance health equity.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated acceptance of learning from other countries, especially for high-income countries to learn from low- and middle-income countries, a practice known as global learning. COVID-19's rapid disease transmission underscored how connected the globe is as well as revealed stark health inequities which facilitated looking outside of one's borders for solutions. The Global Learning for Health Equity (GL4HE) Network, supported by Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, held a 3-part webinar series in December 2021 to understand the current state of global learning and explore how global learning can advance health equity in the post-COVID-19 era. This paper reflects on these cutting-edge discussions about the current state of global learning, drawing upon the highlights, perspectives, and conclusions that emerged from these webinars. The paper also comments on best practices for global learning, including adapting for context, addressing biases, funding considerations, ensuring bidirectional partnerships, community engagement, and adopting a multidisciplinary approach.

Translational Research and Health Equity: Gene Therapies for Sickle Cell Disease as a Case Study.

In August of 2023, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine published a timely report titled "Toward Equitable Innovation in Health and Medicine: A Framework." Here, we review some of the key contributions of the report, focusing on two dimensions of equity: input equity and deployment equity. We then use the example of new gene therapies to treat sickle cell disease (SCD) as a case study of input and deployment equity in translational research. The SCD case study illustrates the need for a kind of translational bioethics with deep understanding of lived experiences and clinical realities as well as a high degree of economic and policy sophistication.

Implementation and early effects of medicaid policy interventions to promote racial equity in pregnancy and early childhood outcomes in Pennsylvania: protocol for a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: There are large racial inequities in pregnancy and early childhood health within state Medicaid programs in the United States. To date, few Medicaid policy interventions have explicitly focused on improving health in Black populations. Pennsylvania Medicaid has adopted two policy interventions to incentivize racial health equity in managed care (equity payment program) and obstetric service delivery (equity focused obstetric bundle). Our research team will conduct a mixed-methods study to investigate the implementation and early effects of these two policy interventions on pregnancy and infant health equity. METHODS: Qualitative interviews will be conducted with Medicaid managed care administrators and obstetric and pediatric providers, and focus groups will be conducted among Medicaid beneficiaries. Quantitative data on healthcare utilization, healthcare quality, and health outcomes among pregnant and parenting people will be extracted from administrative Medicaid healthcare data. Primary outcomes are stakeholder perspectives on policy intervention implementation (qualitative) and timely prenatal care, pregnancy and birth outcomes, and well-child visits (quantitative). Template analysis methods will be applied to qualitative data. Quantitative analyses will use an interrupted time series design to examine changes over time in outcomes among Black people, relative to people of other races, before and after adoption of the Pennsylvania Medicaid equity-focused policy interventions. DISCUSSION: Findings from this study are expected to advance knowledge about how Medicaid programs can best implement policy interventions to promote racial equity in pregnancy and early childhood health.

The Diaspora Human Genomics Institute Launches the Together for Change Initiative: A Transformative, Historic Partnership to Ensure Health Equity in a Time of Unprecedented Technological Advancements.

Human subjects research and drug and device development currently base their findings largely on the genetic data of the non-Hispanic White population, excluding People of Color. This practice puts People of Color at a distinct and potentially deadly disadvantage in being treated for sickness, disability, and disease, as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic. Major disparities exist in all chronic health conditions, including cancer. Data show that less than 2% of genetic information being studied today originates from people of African ancestry. If genomic datasets do not adequately represent People of Color, new drugs and genetic therapies may not work as well as for people of European descent. Addressing the urgent concern that historically marginalized people may again be excluded from the next technological leap affecting human health and the benefits it will bring will requires a paradigm shift. Thus, on behalf of underserved and marginalized people, we developed the Together for CHANGE (T4C) initiative as a unique collaborative public-private partnership to address the concern. The comprehensive programs designed in the T4C initiative, governed by the Diaspora Human Genomics Institute founded by Meharry Medical College, will transform the landscape of education and health care and positively affect global Black communities for decades to come.

Development of a Health Equity Framework for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Clinical practice guidelines can play an important role in mitigating health inequities. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has prioritized addressing health equity and racism in its recommendations. Objective: To develop a framework that would allow the USPSTF to incorporate a health equity lens that spans the entirety of its recommendation-making process. Evidence Review: Key guidance, policy, and explanatory frameworks related to health equity were identified, and their recommendations and findings were mapped to current USPSTF methods. USPSTF members as well as staff from multiple entities supporting the USPSTF portfolio were consulted. Based on all the gathered information, a draft health equity framework and checklist were developed; they were then circulated to the USPSTF's key partners for input and review. Findings: An equity framework was developed that could be applied to all phases of the recommendation process: (1) topic nomination, selection, and prioritization; (2) development of the work plan; (3) evidence review; (4) evidence deliberation; (5) development of the recommendation statement; and (6) dissemination of recommendations. For each phase, several considerations and checklist items to address are presented. These items include using health equity as a prioritization criterion and engaging a diverse group of stakeholders at the earliest phases in identifying topics for recommendations; developing necessary equity-relevant questions (eg, beyond effectiveness and harms) to address during the protocol phase; using methods in synthesizing the evidence and contextual issues in the evidence review related to specific populations experiencing a disproportionate burden of disease; and examining the magnitude and certainty of net benefit, implementation considerations, risk assessment, and evidence gaps through an equity lens when developing evidence-based recommendations. Conclusions and Relevance: Executing this entire framework and checklist as described will be challenging and will take additional time and resources. Nonetheless, whether adopted in its entirety or in parts, this framework offers guidance to the USPSTF, as well as other evidence-based guideline entities, in its mission to develop a more transparent, consistent, and intentional approach to addressing health equity in its recommendations.

How to Create a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Curriculum: More Than Checking a Box.

We are beginning to accept and address the role that medicine as an institution played in legitimizing scientific racism and creating structural barriers to health equity. There is a call for greater emphasis in medical education on explaining our role in perpetuating health inequities and educating learners on how bias and racism lead to poor health outcomes for historically marginalized communities. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI; also referred to as EDI) and antiracism are key parts of patient care and medical education as they empower health professionals to be advocates for their patients, leading to better health care outcomes and more culturally and socially humble health care professionals. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education has set forth standards to include structural competency and other equity principles in the medical curriculum, but medical schools are still struggling with how to specifically do so. Here, we highlight a stepwise approach to systematically developing and implementing medical educational curriculum content with a DEI and antiracism lens. This article serves as a blueprint to prepare institution leadership, medical faculty, staff, and learners in how to effectively begin or scale up their current DEI and antiracism curricular efforts.