Lessons Learned From TranslateCovid, a Multilingual Online Resource Hub for Asian American and Pacific Islander Communities and Beyond.

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated health disparities among immigrant communities. Delivering accurate information and addressing misinformation on protective measures and vaccination to linguistically disadvantaged groups was critical for mitigating the effects of the pandemic. One group that was especially vulnerable to miscommunication about COVID-19 was non-native English-speaking immigrants. To address these disparities, the Asian American Studies Center and the Fielding School of Public Health at the University of California, Los Angeles, partnered to create a multilingual resource hub, TranslateCovid.org, to disseminate credible and reliable information about COVID-19 safety measures, the science behind the vaccines, and vaccine safety. We identified >1300 verified resources in 60 languages from government, academic, and nonprofit organizations and reposted them on the TranslateCovid website. We also developed public service announcement videos on handwashing, use of face masks, and social distancing in 10 languages and a fact sheet for frequently asked questions in 20 languages. We used a participatory approach to develop strategies for disseminating these resources. We discuss lessons learned, including strategies for forming government, community, and academic partnerships to support the timely development and dissemination of information. We conclude with a discussion on the unique role of universities in promoting equitable access to public health resources among immigrant communities in times of crisis.

Vigilance and Protection: How Asian and Pacific Islander, Black, Latina, and Middle Eastern Women Cope with Racism.

BACKGROUND: Research is needed to fully investigate the differential mechanisms racial and ethnic groups use to deal with ongoing intersectional racism in women's lives. The aim of this paper was to understand how Asian American and Pacific Islander, Black, Latina, and Middle Eastern women experience racism-from personal perceptions and interactions to coping mechanisms and methods of protection. METHODS: A purposive sample of 52 participants participated in 11 online racially/ethnically homogeneous focus groups conducted throughout the USA. A team consensus approach was utilized with codebook development and thematic analysis. RESULTS: The findings relate to personal perceptions and interactions related to race and ethnicity, methods of protection against racism, vigilant behavior based on safety concerns, and unity across people of color. A few unique concerns by group included experiences of racism including physical violence among Asian American Pacific Islander groups, police brutality among Black groups, immigration discrimination in Latina groups, and religious discrimination in Middle Eastern groups. Changes in behavior for safety and protection include altering methods of transportation, teaching their children safety measures, and defending their immigration status. They shared strategies to help racial and ethnic minorities against racism including mental health resources and greater political representation. All racial and ethnic groups discussed the need for unity, solidarity, and allyship across various communities of color but for it to be authentic and long-lasting. CONCLUSION: Greater understanding of the types of racism specific groups experience can inform policies and cultural change to reduce those factors.

Getting to the root: Examining within and between home health agency inequities in functional improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify racial, ethnic, and income-based disparities in home health (HH) patients' functional improvement within and between HH agencies (HHAs). DATA SOURCES: 2016-2017 Outcome and Assessment Information Set, Medicare Beneficiary Summary File, and Census data. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Not Applicable. STUDY DESIGN: We use multinomial-logit analyses with and without HHA fixed effects. The outcome is a mutually exclusive five-category outcome: (1) any functional improvement, (2) no functional improvement, (3) death while a patient, (4) transfer to an inpatient setting, and (5) continuing HH as of December 31, 2017. The adjusted outcome rates are calculated by race, ethnicity, and income level using predictive margins. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of the 3+ million Medicare beneficiaries with a HH start-of-care assessment in 2016, 77% experienced functional improvement at discharge, 8% were discharged without functional improvement, 0.6% died, 2% were transferred to an inpatient setting, and 12% continued using HH. Adjusting for individual-level characteristics, Black, Hispanic, American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN), and low-income HH patients were all more likely to be discharged without functional improvement (1.3 pp [95% CI: 1.1, 1.5], 1.5 pp [95% CI: 0.8, 2.1], 1.2 pp [95% CI: 0.6, 1.8], 0.7 pp [95% CI:0.5, 0.8], respectively) compared to White and higher income patients. After including HHA fixed effects, the differences for Black, Hispanic, and AIAN HH patients were mitigated. However, income-based disparities persisted within HHAs. Black-White, Hispanic-White, and AIAN-White disparities were largely driven by between-HHA differences, whereas income-based disparities were mostly due to within-HHA differences, and Asian American/Pacific Islander patients did not experience any observable disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Both within- and between-HHA differences contribute to the overall disparities in functional improvement. Mitigating functional improvement inequities will require a diverse set of culturally appropriate and socially conscious interventions. Improving the quality of HHAs that serve more marginalized patients and incentivizing improved equity within HHAs are approaches that are imperative for ameliorating outcomes.

Whose Knowledge Heals? Transforming Teaching in the Struggle for Health Equity.

Racial health inequities persist despite many attempts to correct them. Inadequate comprehension of racism obscures the ordinariness of racism in public health institutions. In addition to applying critical race theory (CRT) to the research and practice of public health, we argue that the struggle for health equity must also apply CRT toward the teaching of public health students. Adhering to conventional approaches in academic public health without grappling with their roots in Whiteness reproduces a public health workforce that is insufficiently equipped to address the complex, systemic issues underlying health inequities. By default, academic public health excludes the perspectives of scholars of color, relies too heavily on theories of individual behavior, and applies top-down teaching methods. To make durable changes, the rising generation of public health scholars and practitioners must understand how health equity fits within broader struggles for racial and social justice. Thus, we critique three responsibilities for teaching about public health: assigning readings, shaping analytical lenses with theories, and modeling change through andragogy. By questioning whose knowledge is legitimized when defining public health needs, whose lenses are used to prioritize solutions, and whose insights drive change, we can train a public health workforce more critical of racism, and more prepared to deal with the enduring reality of racial relations.

The Water Surrounding the Iceberg: Cultural Racism and Health Inequities.

Policy Points Cultural racism-or the widespread values that privilege and protect Whiteness and White social and economic power-permeates all levels of society, uplifts other dimensions of racism, and contributes to health inequities. Overt forms of racism, such as racial hate crimes, represent only the "tip of the iceberg," whereas structural and institutional racism represent its base. This paper advances cultural racism as the "water surrounding the iceberg," allowing it to float while obscuring its base. Considering the fundamental role of cultural racism is needed to advance health equity. CONTEXT: Cultural racism is a pervasive social toxin that surrounds all other dimensions of racism to produce and maintain racial health inequities. Yet, cultural racism has received relatively little attention in the public health literature. The purpose of this paper is to 1) provide public health researchers and policymakers with a clearer understanding of what cultural racism is, 2) provide an understanding of how it operates in conjunction with the other dimensions of racism to produce health inequities, and 3) offer directions for future research and interventions on cultural racism. METHODS: We conducted a nonsystematic, multidisciplinary review of theory and empirical evidence that conceptualizes, measures, and documents the consequences of cultural racism for social and health inequities. FINDINGS: Cultural racism can be defined as a culture of White supremacy, which values, protects, and normalizes Whiteness and White social and economic power. This ideological system operates at the level of our shared social consciousness and is expressed in the language, symbols, and media representations of dominant society. Cultural racism surrounds and bolsters structural, institutional, personally mediated, and internalized racism, undermining health through material, cognitive/affective, biologic, and behavioral mechanisms across the life course. CONCLUSIONS: More time, research, and funding is needed to advance measurement, elucidate mechanisms, and develop evidence-based policy interventions to reduce cultural racism and promote health equity.

East is east or is it? Racialization of Asian, Middle Eastern, and Pacific Islander persons.

The conventional use of racial categories in health research naturalizes "race" in problematic ways that ignore how racial categories function in service of a White-dominated racial hierarchy. In many respects, racial labels are based on geographic designations. For instance, "Asians" are from Asia. Yet, this is not always a tenable proposition. For example, Afghanistan resides in South Asia, and shares a border with China and Pakistan. Yet, people from Afghanistan are not considered Asian, but Middle Eastern, by the US Census. Furthermore, people on the west side of the Island of New Guinea are considered Asian, whereas those on the eastern side are considered Pacific Islander. In this article, we discuss the complexity of the racial labels related to people originating from Oceania and Asia, and, more specifically, those groups commonly referred to as Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern, and Asian. We begin with considerations of the aggregation fallacy. Just as the ecological fallacy refers to erroneous inferences about individuals from group data, the aggregation fallacy refers to erroneous inferences about subgroups (eg, Hmong) from group data (ie, all Asian Americans), and how these inferences can contribute to stereotypes such as the "model minority." We also examine how group averages can be influenced merely by the composition of the subgroups, and how these, in turn, can be influenced by social policies. We provide a historical overview of some of the issues facing Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern, and Asian communities, and conclude with directions for future research.

Potentially More Out of Reach: Public Reporting Exacerbates Inequities in Home Health Access.

Policy Points Public reporting is associated with both mitigating and exacerbating inequities in high-quality home health agency use for marginalized groups. Ensuring equitable access to home health requires taking a closer look at potentially inequitable policies to ensure that these policies are not inadvertently exacerbating disparities as home health public reporting potentially does. Targeted federal, state, and local interventions should focus on raising awareness about the five-star quality ratings among marginalized populations for whom inequities have been exacerbated. CONTEXT: Literature suggests that public reporting of quality may have the unintended consequence of exacerbating disparities in access to high-quality, long-term care for older adults. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of the home health five-star ratings on changes in high-quality home health agency use by race, ethnicity, income status, and place-based factors. METHODS: We use data from the Outcome and Assessment Information Set, Medicare Enrollment Files, Care Compare, and American Community Survey to estimate differential access to high-quality home health agencies between July 2014 and June 2017. To estimate the impact of the home health five-star rating introduction on the use of high-quality home health agencies, we use a longitudinal observational pretest-posttest design. FINDINGS: After the introduction of the home health five-star ratings in 2016, we found that adjusted rates of high-quality home health agency use increased for all home health patients, except for Hispanic/Latine and Asian American/Pacific Islander patients. Additionally, we found that the disparity in high-quality home health agency use between low-income and higher-income home health patients was exacerbated after the introduction of the five-star quality ratings. We also observed that patients within predominantly Hispanic/Latine neighborhoods had a significant decrease in their use of high-quality home health agencies, whereas patients in predominantly White and integrated neighborhoods had a significant increase in high-quality home health agency use. Other neighborhoods experience a nonsignificant change in high-quality home health agency use. CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers should be aware of the potential unintended consequences for implementing home health public reporting, specifically for Hispanic/Latine, Asian American/Pacific Islander, and low-income home health patients, as well as patients residing in predominantly Hispanic/Latine neighborhoods. Targeted interventions should focus on raising awareness around the five-star ratings.

Visa type and financial strain on depressive symptoms among Filipino migrants to the United States.

Migrants have been theorized to be healthier than their non-migrant counterparts; however, there is limited examination of health selection using binational data and how selection occurs, particularly for mental health outcomes. This study examines the role of visa status and financial strain as critical factors for mental health selection among Filipino migrants to the U.S. and non-migrants who remain in the Philippines. We used the baseline data from the Health of Philippine Emigrants Study (HoPES; n = 1631) to compare depressive symptoms between non-migrants and migrants who were both surveyed prior to their departure to the U.S. We assessed depressive symptoms using linear regression by migration status, financial strain, and by visa categories including fiancée/marriage, unlimited family reunification, limited family reunification, and employment. Overall, all migrants reported lower depressive symptoms than non-migrants; however, depressive symptoms varied by visa type. Fiancée/marriage migrants had lower depressive symptoms than compared to limited family reunification migrants. Additionally, those who reported financial strain had higher depressive symptoms than those without any financial strain. We find that migrants were positively selected for mental health using a unique sample of Filipino migrants before they left for the U.S.

How Discrimination Gets Under the Skin: Biological Determinants of Discrimination Associated With Dysregulation of the Brain-Gut Microbiome System and Psychological Symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Discrimination is associated with negative health outcomes as mediated in part by chronic stress, but a full understanding of the biological pathways is lacking. Here we investigate the effects of discrimination involved in dysregulating the brain-gut microbiome (BGM) system. METHODS: A total of 154 participants underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging to measure functional connectivity. Fecal samples were obtained for 16S ribosomal RNA profiling and fecal metabolites and serum for inflammatory markers, along with questionnaires. The Everyday Discrimination Scale was administered to measure chronic and routine experiences of unfair treatment. A sparse partial least squares-discriminant analysis was conducted to predict BGM alterations as a function of discrimination, controlling for sex, age, body mass index, and diet. Associations between discrimination-related BGM alterations and psychological variables were assessed using a tripartite analysis. RESULTS: Discrimination was associated with anxiety, depression, and visceral sensitivity. Discrimination was associated with alterations of brain networks related to emotion, cognition and self-perception, and structural and functional changes in the gut microbiome. BGM discrimination-related associations varied by race/ethnicity. Among Black and Hispanic individuals, discrimination led to brain network changes consistent with psychological coping and increased systemic inflammation. For White individuals, discrimination was related to anxiety but not inflammation, while for Asian individuals, the patterns suggest possible somatization and behavioral (e.g., dietary) responses to discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Discrimination is attributed to changes in the BGM system more skewed toward inflammation, threat response, emotional arousal, and psychological symptoms. By integrating diverse lines of research, our results demonstrate evidence that may explain how discrimination contributes to health inequalities.

Trends in Health Care Access Disparities Among Asian and Pacific Islander Health Fair Participants in Los Angeles, 2011-2019.

OBJECTIVES: Given several efforts to improve health care access in California and nationally, we studied whether linguistic and socioeconomic disparities in health care access changed from 2011 to 2019 among Asian and Pacific Islander American (APIA) people in Los Angeles, California. METHODS: We analyzed survey responses from APIA health fair participants (n = 5032) in the Greater Los Angeles area from May 15, 2011, through October 20, 2019. To assess the effect of socioeconomic factors on and shifts in health care access (ie, health insurance status/regular doctor), we used a logistic regression model. Covariates included English proficiency, year, age, sex, ethnicity, income, employment, and education. We also ran an interaction analysis between English proficiency and year. RESULTS: Health insurance access increased and doctor access remained stable throughout the study period; however, disparities in health insurance status widened by a factor of 1.08 per year between participants with high English proficiency (HEP) and participants with low English proficiency (LEP) (P = .01). People with HEP were 2.02 times more likely to have a regular doctor than people with LEP (P < .001), and this disparity persisted from 2011 to 2019 (P = .58). Participants who were young (P < .001) and male (P = .005) were significantly less likely to have health insurance and a regular doctor (P < .001) than participants who were older and female. Chinese participants were significantly more likely than Thai (P = .002) and Korean (P < .001) participants to be insured but not more likely to have a regular doctor, when controlling for health insurance. CONCLUSIONS: Policy changes targeting language and cultural barriers to care for APIA people with LEP may address the disparities observed.

Asian American Self-Reported Discrimination in Healthcare and Having a Usual Source of Care.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported racial or ethnic discrimination in a healthcare setting has been linked to worse health outcomes and not having a usual source of care, but has been rarely examined among Asian ethnic subgroups. OBJECTIVE: We examined the association between Asian ethnic subgroup and self-reported discrimination in a healthcare setting, and whether both factors were associated with not having a usual source of care. DESIGN: Using the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) 2015-2017, we used logistic regression models to assess associations among Asian ethnic subgroup, self-reported discrimination, and not having a usual source of care. Interactions between race and self-reported discrimination, foreign-born status, poverty level, and limited English proficiency were also analyzed. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents represented adults age 18 + residing in California who identified as White, Black, Hispanic, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian (including Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and Other Asian), and Other. MAIN MEASURES: We examined two main outcomes: self-reported discrimination in a healthcare setting and having a usual source of care. KEY RESULTS: There were 62,965 respondents. After survey weighting, Asians (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.19-2.66) as an aggregate group were more likely to report discrimination than non-Hispanic Whites. When Asians were disaggregated, Japanese (3.12, 1.36-7.13) and Koreans (2.42, 1.11-5.29) were more likely to report discrimination than non-Hispanic Whites. Self-reported discrimination was marginally associated with not having a usual source of care (1.25, 0.99-1.57). Koreans were the only group associated with not having a usual source of care (2.10, 1.23-3.60). Foreign-born Chinese (ROR 7.42, 95% CI 1.7-32.32) and foreign-born Japanese (ROR 4.15, 95% CI 0.82-20.95) were more associated with self-reported discrimination than being independently foreign-born and Chinese or Japanese. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in self-reported discrimination in a healthcare setting and not having a usual source of care were observed among Asian ethnic subgroups. Better understanding of these differences in their sociocultural contexts will guide interventions to ensure equitable access to healthcare.

Racism During Pregnancy and Birthing: Experiences from Asian and Pacific Islander, Black, Latina, and Middle Eastern Women.

BACKGROUND: Despite persistent racial disparities in maternal health in the USA, there is limited qualitative research on women's experiences of discrimination during pregnancy and childbirth that focuses on similarities and differences across multiple racial groups. METHODS: Eleven focus groups with Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI), Black, Latina, and Middle Eastern women (N = 52) in the USA were conducted to discuss the extent to which racism and discrimination impact pregnancy and birthing experiences. RESULTS: Participants across groups talked about the role of unequal power dynamics, discrimination, and vulnerability in patient-provider relationships. Black participants noted the influence of prior mistreatment by providers in their healthcare decisions. Latinas expressed fears of differential care because of immigration status. Middle Eastern women stated that the Muslim ban bolstered stereotypes. Vietnamese participants discussed how the effect of racism on mothers' mental health could impact their children, while Black and Latina participants expressed constant racism-related stress for themselves and their children. Participants recalled better treatment with White partners and suggested a gradient of treatment based on skin complexion. Participants across groups expressed the value of racial diversity in healthcare providers and pregnancy/birthing-related support but warned that racial concordance alone may not prevent racism and emphasized the need to go beyond "band-aid solutions." CONCLUSION: Women's discussions of pregnancy and birthing revealed common and distinct experiences that varied by race, skin complexion, language, immigration status, and political context. These findings highlight the importance of qualitative research for informing maternal healthcare practices that reduce racial inequities.

Population-level contribution of interpersonal discrimination to psychological distress among Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, and to Indigenous-non-Indigenous inequities: cross-sectional analysis of a community-controlled First Nations cohort study.

BACKGROUND: International and population-specific evidence identifies elevated psychological distress prevalence among those experiencing interpersonal discrimination. We aim to quantify the potential whole-of-population contribution of interpersonal discrimination to psychological distress prevalence and Indigenous-non-Indigenous gaps in Australia. METHODS: We did a cross-sectional analysis of data from Mayi Kuwayu: the National Study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Wellbeing. Baseline surveys were completed between June 8, 2018, and Sept 28, 2022. We analysed responses from participants who were aged 18 years or older at survey completion, whose surveys were processed between Oct 1, 2018, and May 1, 2021. Sample weights were developed on the basis of national population benchmarks. We measured everyday discrimination using an eight-item measure modified from the Everyday Discrimination Scale and classified experiences as racial discrimination if participants attributed these experiences to their Indigeneity. Psychological distress was measured using a validated, modified Kessler-5 scale. Applying logistic regression, we calculated unadjusted odds ratios (ORs), to approximate incident rate ratios (IRRs), for high or very high psychological distress in relation to everyday discrimination and everyday racial discrimination across age-gender strata. Population attributable fractions (PAFs), under the hypothetical assumption that ORs represent causal relationships, were calculated using these ORs and population-level exposure prevalence. These PAFs were used to quantify the contribution of everyday racial discrimination to psychological distress gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous adults. FINDINGS: 9963 survey responses were eligible for inclusion in our study, of which we analysed 9951 (99·9%); 12 were excluded due to responders identifying as a gender other than man or woman (there were too few responses from this demographic to be included as a category in stratified tables or adjusted analyses). The overall prevalence of psychological distress was 48·3% (95% CI 47·0-49·6) in those experiencing everyday discrimination compared with 25·2% (23·8-26·6) in those experiencing no everyday discrimination (OR 2·77 [95% CI 2·52-3·04]) and psychological distress prevalence was 49·0% (95% CI 47·3-50·6) in those experiencing everyday racial discrimination and 31·8% (30·6-33·1) in those experiencing no everyday racial discrimination (OR 2·06 [95% CI 1·88-2·25]. Overall, 49·3% of the total psychological distress burden among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults could be attributable to everyday discrimination (39·4-58·8% across strata) and 27·1% to everyday racial discrimination. Everyday racial discrimination could explain 47·4% of the overall gap in psychological distress between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people (40·0-60·3% across strata). INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that interpersonal discrimination might contribute substantially to psychological distress among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, and to inequities compared with non-Indigenous adults. Estimated PAFs include contributions from social and health disadvantage, reflecting contributions from structural racism. Although not providing strictly conclusive evidence of causality, this evidence is sufficient to indicate the psychological harm of interpersonal discrimination. Findings add weight to imperatives to combat discrimination and structural racism at its core. Urgent individual and policy action is required of non-Indigenous people and colonial structures, directed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Ian Potter Foundation, Australian Research Council, US National Institutes of Health, and Sierra Foundation.

Health selection on self-rated health and the healthy migrant effect: Baseline and 1-year results from the health of Philippine Emigrants Study.

Studies of migration and health focus on a "healthy migrant effect" whereby migrants are healthier than individuals not migrating. Health selection remains the popular explanation of this phenomenon. However, studies are mixed on whether selection occurs and typically examine migrants post-departure. This study used a novel pre-migration dataset to identify which health and social domains differ between migrants and their non-migrant counterparts and their contribution to explaining variance in self-rated health by migrant status at pre-migration and 1-year later. Data were used from the baseline and 1-year follow-up of the Health of Philippine Emigrants Study (HoPES). We used multivariable ordinary least squares regression to examine differences in self-rated health between migrants to the U.S. and a comparable group of non-migrants at baseline (premigration) and one year later, accounting for seven domains: physical health, mental health, health behavior, demographics, socioeconomic factors and healthcare utilization, psychosocial factors, and social desirability. A migrant advantage was present for self-rated health at baseline and 1-year. Accounting for all domains, migrants reported better self-rated health compared to non-migrants both at baseline (ß = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.43) and at 1-year (ß = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.10, 0.46). Migrant status, health behavior, and mental health accounted for most of the variance in self-rated health both at baseline and 1-year follow-up. This analysis provides evidence of migrant health selection and nuanced understanding to what is being captured by self-rated health in studies of migrant health that should be considered in future research.

Considerations of Racism and Data Equity Among Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, And Pacific Islanders in the Context of COVID-19.

Purpose of Review: The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the importance of considering social determinants of health, including factors such as structural racism. This review discusses some of the evidence that triangulates on this issue, including data from hate crime statistics, social media analysis, and survey-based research. It also examines the data needs for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (NHPI) communities. Recent Findings: The available data provides evidence that the pandemic has contributed to an increase in anti-Asian sentiment and discriminatory incidents. Many reports have surfaced showing a surge in anti-Chinese discrimination, which has "spilled over" into other Asian communities. Research is beginning to emerge to show that such discrimination may also impact health issues such as psychological distress. Given prior research, we would expect many more studies to emerge in the future. Also, the pandemic has illustrated the major gaps in data available to disentangle the health and social concerns facing Asian Americans and NHPI communities. Significant issues include the lack of systematic reporting of data for these communities both across states, and even among agencies within a state; erroneous aggregation of Asians with NHPIs; and censoring of data. These gaps and issues contribute to bias that obscures objective data and amplifies health inequalities. Summary: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the well-being of Asian American and NHPI communities. It is critical to provide disaggregated data, not only so that we can have accurate reporting, but also to ensure data and health equity.

Out Of Reach: Inequities In The Use Of High-Quality Home Health Agencies.

Patients receiving home health services from high-quality home health agencies often experience fewer adverse outcomes (for example, hospitalizations) than patients receiving services from low-quality agencies. Using administrative data from 2016 and regression analysis, we examined individual- and neighborhood-level racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors associated with the use of high-quality home health agencies. We found that Black and Hispanic home health patients had a 2.2-percentage-point and a 2.5-percentage-point lower adjusted probability of high-quality agency use, respectively, compared with their White counterparts within the same neighborhoods. Low-income patients had a 1.2-percentage-point lower adjusted probability of high-quality agency use compared with their higher-income counterparts, whereas home health patients residing in neighborhoods with higher proportions of marginalized residents had a lower adjusted probability of high-quality agency use. Some 40-77 percent of the disparities in high-quality agency use were attributable to neighborhood-level factors. Ameliorating these inequities will require policies that dismantle structural and institutional barriers related to residential segregation.

The association between Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, health access, and mental health: the role of discrimination, medical mistrust, and stigma.

OBJECTIVE: There are approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US, including 1.3 million young adults who are eligible for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. It is unclear how DACA influences engagement in healthcare or depressive symptoms, and the role of discrimination, medical mistrust, and stigma in healthcare settings. This study assesses the association of DACA on undocumented young adults' engagement with health care and depressive symptoms. DESIGN: We conducted an internet-based survey examining the health-related experiences of undocumented Latino and Asians and Pacific Islander (API) young adults in California (n = 218) between June and August 2017. Multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to assess the influence of DACA, discrimination, medical mistrust, and stigma on healthcare engagement and depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Approximately 78% of respondents had a gap in healthcare, and about 31% reported high levels of depressive symptoms. Controlling for demographic characteristics, compared to those without DACA, DACA-recipients had lower odds of reporting gaps in healthcare engagement (aOR = 0.270, p < 0.05) and depressive symptoms (aOR = 0.115, p < 0.01). Those facing discrimination, medical mistrust, and stigma in healthcare settings were less likely to have a healthcare visit and more likely to have higher depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: DACA is a potential strategy to improve healthcare access and address the mental health of undocumented populations. In particular, issues of discrimination, stigma by healthcare providers, and medical mistrust need to be addressed.

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.

Prevalence of Everyday Discrimination and Relation with Wellbeing among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Adults in Australia.

Discrimination is a fundamental determinant of health and health inequities. However, despite the high prevalence of discrimination exposure, there is limited evidence specific to Indigenous populations on the link between discrimination and health. This study employs a validated measure to quantify experiences of everyday discrimination in a national sample of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Australia's Indigenous peoples) adults surveyed from 2018 to 2020 (≥16 years, n = 8108). It quantifies Prevalence Ratios (PRs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) for wellbeing outcomes by level of discrimination exposure, and tests if associations vary by attribution of discrimination to Indigeneity. Of the participants, 41.5% reported no discrimination, 47.5% low, and 11.0% moderate-high. Discrimination was more commonly reported by younger versus older participants, females versus males, and those living in remote versus urban or regional areas. Discrimination was significantly associated in a dose-response manner, with measures of social and emotional wellbeing, culture and identity, health behaviour, and health outcomes. The strength of the association varied across outcomes, from a 10-20% increased prevalence for some outcomes (e.g., disconnection from culture (PR = 1.08; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.14), and high blood pressure (1.20; 1.09, 1.32)), to a five-fold prevalence of alcohol dependence (4.96; 3.64, 6.76), for those with moderate-high versus no discrimination exposure. The association was of consistent strength and direction whether attributed to Indigeneity or not-with three exceptions. Discrimination is associated with a broad range of poor wellbeing outcomes in this large-scale, national, diverse cohort of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. These findings support the vast potential to improve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' wellbeing, and to reduce Indigenous-non-Indigenous inequities, by reducing exposure to discrimination.

Advocacy, Hesitancy, and Equity: Exploring U.S. Race-Related Discussions of the COVID-19 Vaccine on Twitter.

BACKGROUND: Our study aimed to describe themes of tweets related to COVID-19 vaccines, race, and ethnicity to explore the context of the intersection of these topics on Twitter. METHODS: We utilized Twitter's Streaming Application Programming Interface (API) to collect a random 1% sample of publicly available tweets from October 2020 to January 2021. The study team conducted a qualitative content analysis from the full data set of 1110 tweets. RESULTS: The tweets revealed vaccine support through vaccine affirmation, advocacy through reproach, a need for a vaccine, COVID-19 and racism, vaccine development and efficacy, racist vaccine humor, and news updates. Vaccine opposition was demonstrated through direct opposition, vaccine hesitancy, and adverse reactions. Conspiracy and misinformation included scientific misinformation, political misinformation, beliefs about immunity and protective behaviors, and race extermination conspiracy. Equity and access focused on overcoming history of medical racism, pointing out health disparities, and facilitators to vaccine access. Representation touted pride in development and role models, and politics discussed the role of politics in vaccines and international politics. CONCLUSION: Our analysis demonstrates that Twitter can provide nuances about multiple viewpoints on the vaccine related to race and ethnicity and can be beneficial in contributing to insights for public health messaging.