Racial and ethnic inequities in the quality of paediatric care in the USA: a review of quantitative evidence.

Racial and ethnic inequities in paediatric care have received increased research attention over the past two decades, particularly in the past 5 years, alongside an increased societal focus on racism. In this Series paper, the first in a two-part Series focused on racism and child health in the USA, we summarise evidence on racial and ethnic inequities in the quality of paediatric care. We review studies published between Jan 1, 2017 and July 31, 2022, that are adjusted for or stratified by insurance status to account for group differences in access, and we exclude studies in which differences in access are probably driven by patient preferences or the appropriateness of intervention. Overall, the literature reveals widespread patterns of inequitable treatment across paediatric specialties, including neonatology, primary care, emergency medicine, inpatient and critical care, surgery, developmental disabilities, mental health care, endocrinology, and palliative care. The identified studies indicate that children from minoritised racial and ethnic groups received poorer health-care services relative to non-Hispanic White children, with most studies drawing on data from multiple sites, and accounting for indicators of family socioeconomic position and clinical characteristics (eg, comorbidities or condition severity). The studies discussed a range of potential causes for the observed disparities, including implicit biases and differences in site of care or clinician characteristics. We outline priorities for future research to better understand and address paediatric treatment inequities and implications for practice and policy. Policy changes within and beyond the health-care system, discussed further in the second paper of this Series, are essential to address the root causes of treatment inequities and to promote equitable and excellent health for all children.

Household income supplements in early childhood to reduce inequities in children's development.

BACKGROUND: Early childhood interventions have the potential to reduce children's developmental inequities. We aimed to estimate the extent to which household income supplements for lower-income families in early childhood could close the gap in children's developmental outcomes and parental mental health. METHODS: Data were drawn from a nationally representative birth cohort, the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (N = 5107), which commenced in 2004 and conducted follow-ups every two years. Exposure was annual household income (0-1 year). Outcomes were children's developmental outcomes, specifically social-emotional, physical functioning, and learning (bottom 15% versus top 85%) at 4-5 years, and an intermediate outcome, parental mental health (poor versus good) at 2-3 years. We modelled hypothetical interventions that provided a fixed-income supplement to lower-income families with a child aged 0-1 year. Considering varying eligibility scenarios and amounts motivated by actual policies in the Australian context, we estimated the risk of poor outcomes for eligible families under no intervention and the hypothetical intervention using marginal structural models. The reduction in risk under intervention relative to no intervention was estimated. RESULTS: A single hypothetical supplement of AU$26,000 (equivalent to ∼USD$17,350) provided to lower-income families (below AU$56,137 (∼USD$37,915) per annum) in a child's first year of life demonstrated an absolute reduction of 2.7%, 1.9% and 2.6% in the risk of poor social-emotional, physical functioning and learning outcomes in children, respectively (equivalent to relative reductions of 12%, 10% and 11%, respectively). The absolute reduction in risk of poor mental health in eligible parents was 1.0%, equivalent to a relative reduction of 7%. Benefits were similar across other income thresholds used to assess eligibility (range, AU$73,329-$99,864). CONCLUSIONS: Household income supplements provided to lower-income families may benefit children's development and parental mental health. This intervention should be considered within a social-ecological approach by stacking complementary interventions to eliminate developmental inequities.

The potential of intervening on childhood adversity to reduce socioeconomic inequities in body mass index and inflammation among Australian and UK children: A causal mediation analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lower maternal education is associated with higher body mass index (BMI) and higher chronic inflammation in offspring. Childhood adversity potentially mediates these associations. We examined the extent to which addressing childhood adversity could reduce socioeconomic inequities in these outcomes. METHODS: We analysed data from two early-life longitudinal cohorts: the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC; n=1873) and the UK Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC; n=7085). EXPOSURE: low/medium (below university degree) versus high maternal education, as a key indicator of family socioeconomic position (0-1 year). OUTCOMES: BMI and log-transformed glycoprotein acetyls (GlycA) (LSAC: 11-12 years; ALSPAC: 15.5 years). Mediator: multiple adversities (≥2/<2) indicated by family violence, mental illness, substance abuse and harsh parenting (LSAC: 2-11 years; ALSPAC: 1-12 years). A causal mediation analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Low/medium maternal education was associated with up to 1.03 kg/m2 higher BMI (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.10) and up to 1.69% higher GlycA (95% CI: 1.68 to 1.71) compared with high maternal education, adjusting for confounders. Causal mediation analysis estimated that decreasing the levels of multiple adversities in children with low/medium maternal education to be like their high maternal education peers could reduce BMI inequalities by up to 1.8% and up to 3.3% in GlycA. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings in both cohorts suggest that slight reductions in socioeconomic inequities in children's BMI and inflammation could be achieved by addressing childhood adversities. Public health and social policy efforts should help those affected by childhood adversity, but also consider underlying socioeconomic conditions that drive health 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.

The effect of adverse and positive experiences on inflammatory markers in Australian and UK children.

Background: The relationship between childhood adversity and inflammation is well-established. Examination of positive experiences can provide a more complete understanding of intervention opportunities. We investigated associations of adverse and positive experiences, and their intersection, with inflammation in children and adolescents. Methods: Data sources: Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC; N = 1237) and Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC; N = 3488). Exposures: Adverse and positive experiences assessed repeatedly (LSAC: 0-11 years; ALSPAC: 0-15 years). Outcomes: Inflammation quantified by high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and glycoprotein acetyls (GlycA) (LSAC: 11-12 years; ALSPAC: 15.5 years). Analyses: Linear regression on the log-transformed outcomes estimated the relative difference in inflammatory markers with adverse/positive experiences, adjusting for socio-demographics and concurrent positive/adverse experiences, respectively. Results: Most associations were in the expected direction but differed in magnitude by exposure, outcome and cohort. Across both cohorts, adverse experiences were associated with up to 7.3% higher hsCRP (95% CI: -18.6%, 33.2%) and up to 2.0% higher GlycA (95% CI: 0.5%, 3.5%); while positive experiences were associated with up to 22.1% lower hsCRP (95% CI: -49.0%, 4.7%) and 1.3% lower GlycA (95% CI: -2.7%, 0.2%). In LSAC, the beneficial effect of positive experiences on inflammation was more pronounced among those with fewer concurrent adverse experiences. Conclusion: Across two cohorts, we found small but directionally consistent associations between adverse experiences and higher inflammation, and positive experiences and lower inflammation, particularly for GlycA. Future research should give further consideration to positive experiences to complement the current focus on adversity and inform the design and evaluation of early life interventions.

Supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Families to Stay Together from the Start (SAFeST Start): Urgent call to action to address crisis in infant removals.

Reducing the rate of over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out-of-home care (OOHC) is a key Closing the Gap target committed to by all Australian governments. Current strategies are failing. The "gap" is widening, with the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in OOHC at 30 June 2020 being 11 times that of non-Indigenous children. Approximately, one in five Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children entering OOHC each year are younger than one year. These figures represent compounding intergenerational trauma and institutional harm to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and communities. This article outlines systemic failures to address the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents during pregnancy and following birth, causing cumulative harm and trauma to families, communities and cultures. Major reform to child and family notification and service systems, and significant investment to address this crisis, is urgently needed. The Family Matters Building Blocks and five elements of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle (Prevention, Participation, Partnership, Placement and Connection) provide a transformative foundation to address historical, institutional, well-being and socioeconomic drivers of current catastrophic trajectories. The time for action is now.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Everyday Discrimination Scale and biomarker outcomes.

Discrimination has consistently been associated with multiple adverse health outcomes. Like other psychosocial stressors, discrimination is thought to impact health through stress-related physiologic pathways including hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activation, dysregulation of inflammation responses, and accelerated cellular aging. Given growing attention to research examining the biological pathways through which discrimination becomes embodied, this systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizes empirical evidence examining relationships between self-reported discrimination and four biomarker outcomes (i.e., cortisol, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and telomere length) among studies that have used the Everyday Discrimination Scale. We conducted a systematic review of studies discussing self-reported, everyday, or chronic discrimination in the context of health by searching Medline / PubMed (National Library of Medicine, NCBI), PsycInfo (APA, Ebsco) and Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate). Twenty-five articles met the criteria for meta-analysis, with several reporting on multiple outcomes. Discrimination was associated with elevated CRP levels (r = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.20, k = 10), though not cortisol (r = 0.05; 95% CI: -0.06, 0.16, k = 9), IL-6 (r = 0.05; 95% CI: -0.32, 0.42, k = 5), or telomere length (r = 0.03; 95% CI: -0.01, 0.07, k = 6). We identify several points of consideration for future research including addressing heterogeneity in assessment of biomarker outcomes and the need for longitudinal assessments of relationships between discrimination and biomarker outcomes.

Family Stressors and Resources as Social Determinants of Health among Caregivers and Young Children.

Life course-informed theories of development suggest it is important to integrate information about positive and negative aspects of the social environment into studies of child and parental wellbeing, including both stressors that compromise health and resources that promote well-being. We recruited a sample of 169 pairs of caregivers and young children (birth to 5 years) from a community health clinic and administered survey questions to assess stressors and resources. We constructed inventories of stressors and resources and examined the relationships between these inventories and caregivers' depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and sleep problems, and young children's medical diagnoses derived from electronic health records. Cumulative stressors and resources displayed bivariate and adjusted associations with caregivers' depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and sleep problems. For depressive and anxiety symptoms, these associations were evident in models that included stressors and resources together. Caregivers with high stressors and low resources displayed the highest levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms and sleep problems. In terms of children's health outcomes, only modest trends were evident for developmental/mental health outcomes, but not other diagnostic categories. Future studies are needed to examine stressors and resources together in larger samples and in relation to prospectively assessed measures of child well-being.

Inequalities in the distribution of COVID-19-related financial difficulties for Australian families with young children.

BACKGROUND: We examine (1) the frequency of financial difficulties in Australian families with young children (0-8 years) in the early and later phases of the pandemic; (2) the extent to which parents' pre-pandemic socio-economic disadvantage (SED) predicted financial difficulties; and (3) whether grandparent intergenerational SED further amplified this risk. METHOD: Data: Australian Temperament Project (ATP; established 1983, N = 2443) and ATP Generation 3 study (ATPG3; established 2012; N = 702), of which 74% (N = 553) completed a COVID-specific module in the early (May-September 2020) and/or later (October-December 2021) phases of the pandemic. OUTCOMES: Parent-reported loss of employment/reduced income, difficulty paying for essentials, and financial strain. EXPOSURES: Pre-pandemic parent and grandparent education and occupation. ANALYSIS: Logistic regressions, estimated via generalized estimating equations, were used to examine associations between the pre-pandemic SED of parents and grandparents and their interaction with financial difficulties, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: At both pandemic time points, a third of parents reported adverse financial impacts (early: 34%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 30-38; later: 32%, 95% CI = 28-36). Each standard deviation increase in the parents' pre-pandemic SED was associated with a 36% increase in the odds of reporting multiple financial difficulties (odds ratio [OR] = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.04-1.78). There was little evidence of an interaction between the SED of parents and grandparents. CONCLUSIONS: Financial impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic were common and, irrespective of grandparent SED, disproportionately borne by parents with higher pre-pandemic SED. Given the well-established relationship between disadvantage and child health and development, sustained and well-targeted government supports will be critical to minimizing adverse impacts in years to come.

Reflection on modern methods: statistical, policy and ethical implications of using age-standardized health indicators to quantify inequities.

Methods for calculating health indicators profoundly influence understanding of and action on population health and inequities. Age-standardization can be useful and is commonly applied to account for differences in age structures when comparing health indicators across groups. Age-standardized rates have well-acknowledged limitations, including that they are relative indices for comparison, and not accurate measures of actual rates where the age structures of groups diverge. This paper explores these limitations, and demonstrates alternative approaches through a case study quantifying mortality rates within the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) population of Australia and inequities compared with the non-Indigenous population, over 2001-16. Applying the Australian Standard Population, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander age-standardized mortality rate was more than double the crude mortality rate in 2001 and 2016, inflated through high weighting of older age groups. Despite divergent population age structures, age-standardized mortality rates remain a key policy metric for measuring progress in reducing Indigenous-non-Indigenous inequities in Australia. Focusing on outcomes age-standardized to the total population can obscure inequities, and denies Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities valid, actionable information about their health and well-being. Age-specific statistics convey the true magnitude of health risks and highlight high-risk subgroups. When requiring standardization, standardizing to a population-specific standard (here, an Indigenous standard) generates metrics centred around and reflective of reality for the population of focus, supporting communities' self-determination to identify priorities and informing resource allocation and service delivery. The principles outlined here apply across populations, including Indigenous and other populations internationally.

Social Patterning of Racial Discrimination Among a Diverse Sample of School-Aged Children in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of young childrens' reported experiences of racial discrimination and to assess whether discriminatory experiences vary by gender, religion and country of birth. METHODS: Data came from Speak Out Against Racism (SOAR), a cross-sectional study of 4664 public school students in grades 5-9 in two Australian states in 2017. An adaption of the Adolescent Discrimination Distress Index (ADDI), as a measure of discrimination, was used across four Indigenous and ethnic categories (Indigenous, Asian and non-Asian visible minorities, Anglo/European). Effect-measure modification (EMM) examined how experiences of racial discrimination across ethnic groups varied by gender, country of birth and religion. RESULTS: A sizeable proportion (40%) of students reported experiencing racial discrimination. Indigenous, Asian and non-Asian visible minority students reported higher rates of experiencing racial discrimination than their Anglo-European peers. Male students reported higher rates of experiencing racial discrimination than female students. Foreign-born students reported experiencing racial discrimination more often than native-born students, and both Christian and religious minorities experienced racial discrimination more often than students identifying with the dominant "No religion" group. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the prevalence of racial discrimination among adolescents and how gender, country of birth and religion can increase risk of these experiences.

Measuring Positive Childhood Experiences: Testing the Structural and Predictive Validity of the Health Outcomes From Positive Experiences (HOPE) Framework.

OBJECTIVE: Positive childhood experiences (PCEs), that occur within secure and nurturing social environments, are fundamental to healthy physical, social-emotional, and cognitive development. However, reliable measures of these experiences are not yet widely available. We used data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC) to empirically represent and psychometrically evaluate 3 primary domains of PCEs defined within the Health Outcomes from Positive Experiences (HOPE) framework, specifically: 1) nurturing and supportive relationships; 2) safe and protective environments and; 3) constructive social engagement and connectedness. METHODS: LSAC is a nationally representative cohort that has followed young Australians from birth since 2004. LSAC data were used to represent the 3 primary HOPE-PCEs domains (birth to 11 years) across 4 inter-related PCEs constructs: 1) positive parenting, 2) trusting and supportive relationships, 3) supportive neighborhood and home learning environments, and 4) social engagement and enjoyment. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the proposed 4-factor structure. Predictive validity was examined through associations with mental health problems and academic difficulties at 14 to 15 years. RESULTS: The 4-factor structure was supported by empirical data at each time point. Higher exposure to PCEs across each domain was associated with lower reporting of mental health problems (ß = -0.20 to -2.05) and academic difficulties (ß = -0.01 to -0.13) in adolescence. CONCLUSIONS: The 4 LSAC-based HOPE-PCEs have sufficient internal coherence and predictive validity to offer a potentially useful way of conceptualizing and measuring PCEs in future cohort studies and intervention trials aiming to enhance the understanding of, and mitigate the negative impacts of, adverse childhood experiences.

Risk of severe illness from COVID-19 among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults: the construct of 'vulnerable populations' obscures the root causes of health inequities.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the prevalence of known health-related risk factors for severe COVID-19 illness among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, and their relationship with social determinants. METHODS: Weighted cross-sectional analysis of the 2018-19 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey; Odds Ratios for cumulative risk count category (0, 1, or ≥2 health-related risk factors) by social factors calculated using ordered logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the adult population, 42.9%(95%CI:40.6,45.2) had none of the examined health-related risk factors; 38.9%(36.6,41.1) had 1, and 18.2%(16.7,19.7) had ≥2. Adults experiencing relative advantage across social indicators had significantly lower cumulative risk counts, with 30-70% lower odds of being in a higher risk category. CONCLUSIONS: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must continue to be recognised as a priority population in all stages of pandemic preparedness and response as they have disproportionate exposure to social factors associated with risk of severe COVID-19 illness. Indigeneity itself is not a 'risk' factor and must be viewed in the wider context of inequities that impact health Implications for public health: Multi-sectoral responses are required to improve health during and after the COVID-19 pandemic that: enable self-determination; improve incomes, safety, food security and culturally-safe healthcare; and address discrimination and trauma.

Linking discrimination and sleep with biomarker profiles: An investigation in the MIDUS study.

Self-reported experiences of discrimination and sleep dysfunction have both been shown to adversely impact biological functioning; however, few studies have examined how they are jointly associated with health. The current study draws from two samples of the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) data (n = 617 participants; 59.8% female; 72.3% White and 27.7% African American; Age: Mean = 52.6, SD = 12.22) to identify profiles of sleep (duration, variability, onset latency, wake after sleep onset, naps) and discrimination (everyday, lifetime, impact). Associations with latent profiles of biomarkers of inflammation (CRP, fibrinogen, IL-6) and endocrine stress (cortisol, epinephrine, norepinephrine) were examined. Three profiles were identified for sleep/discrimination (good, fair, poor) and for biomarkers (average, high inflammation, high neuroendocrine). Chi-square analyses indicated that adults in the good sleep/low discrimination profile were more likely to be in the average biomarker profile but less likely to be in the high inflammation profile. Adults in the fair sleep/moderate discrimination risk profile were more likely to be in the high inflammation profile. Adults in the poor sleep/high discrimination risk profile were less likely to be in the average biomarker profile but more likely to be in the high inflammation profile. The current study identified configurations of sleep and discrimination among midlife adults which were associated with profiles of biological risk. The findings provide implications for identifying individuals who may be at increased risk of developing stress-related tertiary outcomes of morbidity and disease.

The association between experiences of religious discrimination, social-emotional and sleep outcomes among youth in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Religious-based hate crimes are on the rise worldwide. However, the relationship of religious discrimination on health and well-being, especially earlier on the lifecourse, is largely understudied. This study examines the prevalence of religious discrimination and the relationship it has on social-emotional adjustment and sleep outcomes among a diverse sample of students in Australia. METHODS: Data came from Speak Out Against Racism, a population-representative cross-sectional study of 4664 public school students in grades 5-9 in Australia in 2017. An adaption of the Adolescent Discrimination Distress Index (ADDI), was used to derive four measures of religious discrimination (peer, school, societal and the sum of those as a "total" score). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire measured the total difficulties, conduct, emotional, and prosocial behavior subscales. Measures of sleep outcomes included duration, latency, and disruption. RESULTS: 27 % (95 % CI 22.82, 31.12) of students reported experiences of direct total religious discrimination with higher levels being reported by students identifying as a religious minority. There was strong evidence that experiences of religious discrimination (across all four sources) was related to all measures of socioemotional adjustment and sleep outcomes. DISCUSSION: Religious discrimination is an understudied form of social disadvantage that has implications for adolescents' development, health and well-being. Conclusion: More programs, particularly in the school-context, address religious-based discrimination may reduce inequities in health.

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.

Promoting proactive bystander responses to racism and racial discrimination in primary schools: a mixed methods evaluation of the 'Speak Out Against Racism' program pilot.

BACKGROUND: Racism and racial discrimination are fundamental causes and determinants of health and health inequalities globally, with children and adolescents particularly vulnerable. Racial discrimination is a common stressor in the lives of many children and adolescents, with growing evidence of negative associations between racial discrimination and multiple domains of child and adolescent health. Addressing racism and racial discrimination must be core public health priorities, even more so among children and young people. Schools are key settings in the lives of children and adolescents and become increasingly more important to identity formation. School communities, teachers and peers greatly influence children and adolescents' beliefs about race and difference. Schools are therefore key sites for the delivery of population-based programs to reduce racism and promote proactive bystander behaviour and healthy resistance to racism among all children and adolescents as well as among the adults. METHODS: This study examines the feasibility and acceptability of the 'Speak Out Against Racism (SOAR)' program, a whole of school, multi-level, multi-strategy program that aimed to promote effective bystander responses to racism and racial discrimination in primary schools. A mixed-methods, quasi-experimental design was used. Students in Years 5 and 6 (10-12 years) across six schools completed surveys pre- and post- intervention (N = 645; 52% female; 6% Indigenous, 10% Middle Eastern, African, Latinx or Pacific Islander, 21% Asian, 52% Anglo/European). Focus groups with students and interviews with staff collected qualitative data about their experiences of the program and their views about the program's perceived need, implementation, impacts and suggested improvements. RESULTS: Quantitative data showed student prosocial skills and teacher inter-racial climate improved in intervention schools compared to comparison schools. Qualitative data highlighted teacher attitudinal and behaviour change regarding racism, and student reduced interpersonal racial discrimination, improved peer prosocial norms, commitment to anti-racism, knowledge of proactive bystander responses and confidence and self-efficacy to intervene to address racism. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides quantitative evidence of the potential of the SOAR program to improve the prosocial skills of students and their perceptions of the inter-racial school climate provided by their teachers. This program also provided qualitative evidence of the potential to promote teacher and student attitudinal and behavioural change. Further refinement and testing of the program in a large scale implementation trial is recommended.

Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the relationship between reported racism and health and well-being for children and youth: a protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Racism is a critical determinant of health and health inequities for children and youth. This protocol aims to update the first systematic review conducted by Priest et al (2013), including a meta-analysis of findings. Based on previous empirical data, it is anticipated that child and youth health will be negatively impacted by racism. Findings from this review will provide updated evidence of effect sizes across outcomes and identify moderators and mediators of relationships between racism and health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies that examine associations between experiences of racism and racial discrimination with health outcomes of children and youth aged 0-24 years. Exposure measures include self-reported or proxy reported systemic, interpersonal and intrapersonal racism. Outcome measures include general health and well-being, physical health, mental health, biological markers, healthcare utilisation and health behaviours. A comprehensive search of studies from the earliest time available to October 2020 will be conducted. A random effects meta-analysis will examine the average effect of racism on a range of health outcomes. Study-level moderation will test the difference in effect sizes with regard to various sample and exposure characteristics. This review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will provide evidence for future research within the field and help to support policy and practice development. Results will be widely disseminated to both academic and non-academic audiences through peer-review publications, community summaries and presentations to research, policy, practice and community audiences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020184055.