Categorical and anti-categorical approaches to US racial/ethnic groupings: revisiting the National 2009 H1N1 Flu Survey (NHFS)

“Black race”, “Schwarze Hautfarbe”, “Origine africaine”, or “Etnia nera”? The absent presence of race in European pharmaceutical regulation

Current scholarship on race in Europe has described race as an “absent presence”. However, little is known about the dynamics of the absentness and presentness of race, including how various social processes operating at distinct levels (e.g. supranational and national) influence the uses of race and ethnicity concepts. We begin addressing this gap by examining racialised pharmaceutical regulation in the EU and its operationalisation in European countries. We analysed patterns of English-language uses of race and ethnicity terms at the EU level for all new drugs approved in 2014–2018, and systematically compared official translations into 24 languages. We found that “race” was promoted in plain sight and often retained when translated, albeit with much inconsistency across languages, creating peculiar patterns of presentness and absentness of race. Finnish, French, Swedish, and German stood out, as “race” was often translated into ethnicity terms, but even in those languages, “race” lingered despite claims that these countries vehemently opposed “race”. Our findings should inform scholarly and political debates about race, ethnicity, and medicine in Europe that tend to assume, incorrectly, an anti-racialist consensus. There are also policy implications, because prescribers may interpret regulator-approved information about race and ethnicity differently because of inconsistent translations.

Attitudes Toward HPV Vaccination in Sweden: A Survey Study

Background

While HPV vaccination uptake in Sweden is quite high, at around 80%, vaccine hesitancy remains an issue in countries throughout Europe. The latter can be related to a contemporary context of increased contestation of expert knowledge and of a large share of information on health-related issues including vaccination today being sought via the internet. Still, there is a paucity of recent research on attitudes toward the HPV vaccine in a larger sample of the population in Sweden. This survey study assesses such attitudes and any correlations between vaccine hesitancy and sociodemographic characteristics, trust in healthcare and other societal institutions, and evaluation of the reliability of different sources of information.

Methods

The validated survey questionnaire was distributed to adult women in Sweden (n = 2,000), via a nationally representative web panel. The response rate was 37%. Aside from descriptive statistics, associations between vaccine hesitancy and sociodemographic and other variables were computed using logistic regressions and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

Results

Our results show a positive attitude toward HPV vaccination overall. Still, some degree of HPV vaccine hesitancy was indicated by 33.8% of the respondents, and more pronounced hesitancy by 7.6%. Regarding vaccination in general, a very positive attitude was indicated by 55%. HPV vaccine hesitancy was associated with low education and low income and strongly associated with a lack of confidence in healthcare and other societal institutions. It was also correlated with a self-assessed lack of access to, and ability to assess the origin, quality and reliability of, information about the HPV vaccine.

Conclusion

Efforts to provide transparent information about HPV vaccination should be combined with healthcare providers being open to discuss vaccine concerns with patients and avoiding practices that do not promote trust.

Placing intersectional inequalities in health

Research into geographical inequalities in health has focused almost exclusively on examining the effects of area-level deprivation and has been largely framed through a compositional-contextual lens, their inter-relationship and the influence of vertical macro-economic and political/policy drivers. However, in the broader health inequalities field, intersectionality has recently emerged as a critical theoretical and methodical approach which examines the concurrent and interacting influences on health of multiple axes of inequality (such as socio-economic status, gender, race/ethnicity and sexuality or gender-identity). Simultaneously, social geography has been explicitly using intersectionality to analyse how mutually constitutive forms of social oppression interact and interrelate with place. This paper exploits the analytical space opened up by this 'intersectional turn' by outlining the benefits for research into geographical inequalities in health that can be achieved by taking a more explicit approach to intersectional inequalities. It argues that: (1) geographical research into health inequalities should more explicitly and widely apply an intersectional lens; and relatedly that, in turn, (2) place needs to be considered as an aspect of intersectionality and integrated into the wider intersectional inequalities in health literature. The paper summarises the evolution of theories of place and health inequalities and outlines intersectional theory and the work to date that has been undertaken to integrate this perspective into our understanding of health inequalities. Drawing on the social geography literature into place and intersectionality, the paper explores how this perspective is being used to enhance our understanding of place effects more generally - and how place itself can be considered as an element of intersectional inequalities. Drawing these different bodies of work together, the paper concludes by considering the implications for theories of geographical inequalities in health.

Comparing racial health disparities in pandemics a decade apart: H1N1 and COVID-19

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported disproportionate health disparities with respect to disease for Blacks/African Americans (AAs) compared to Whites in the USA. In this paper, we identify and compare the factors involved in creating these disparities among these populations during the 2009 H1N1 and current COVID-19 pandemics.

METHODS

We included studies describing health disparities towards Blacks/AAs in the USA during the H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics. Only observational empirical studies with free full-text availability in English from PubMed, PubMed Central and Google Scholar were included.

RESULTS

A total of 31 papers were included: 19 pertaining to the H1N1 pandemic and 12 to the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative analysis for health disparities resulted in 43 different factors, which were subdivided into nine overarching themes.

DISCUSSION

The similarities that exist between the two pandemics indicate that there are many neglected issues in American healthcare that need to be addressed. The listed factors have led to disparities in screening and treating for disease resulting in disparities in infection rates, severity of illness and mortality. This calls for a change in healthcare dynamics to improve access to healthcare, remove any form of possible discrimination, and regain the lost trust with the Black/AA communities, repairing historical damage.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective utilisation of social media and faith-based centres to educate patients, implementation of new policies improving access to healthcare, and culture-sensitive education for healthcare providers are suggested to decrease health disparities and improve health outcomes across the USA.

Reconceptualising precision public health

As currently conceived, precision public health is at risk of becoming precision medicine at a population level. This paper outlines a framework for precision public health that, in contrast to its current operationalisation, is consistent with public health principles because it integrates factors at all levels, while illuminating social position as a fundamental determinant of health and health inequities. We review conceptual foundations of public health, outline a proposed framework for precision public health and describe its operationalisation within research and practice. Social position shapes individuals' unequal experiences of the social determinants of health. Thus, in our formulation, precision public health investigates how multiple dimensions of social position interact to confer health risk differently for precisely defined population subgroups according to the social contexts in which they are embedded, while considering relevant biological and behavioural factors. It leverages this information to uncover the precise and intersecting social structures that pattern health outcomes, and to identify actionable interventions within the social contexts of affected groups. We contend that studies informed by this framework offer greater potential to improve health than current conceptualisations of precision public health that do not address root causes. Moreover, expanding beyond master categories of social position and operationalising these categories in more precise ways across time and place can enrich public health research through greater attention to the heterogeneity of social positions, their causes and health effects, leading to the identification of points of intervention that are specific enough to be useful in reducing health inequities. Failure to attend to this level of particularity may mask the true nature of health risk, the causal mechanisms at play and appropriate interventions. Conceptualised thus, precision public health is a research endeavour with much to offer by way of understanding and intervening on the causes of poor health and health inequities.As currently conceived, precision public health is at risk of becoming precision medicine at a population level. This paper outlines a framework for precision public health that, in contrast to its current operationalization, is consistent with public health principles because it integrates factors at all levels, while illuminating social position as a fundamental determinant of health and health inequities. We review conceptual foundations of public health, outline a proposed framework for precision public health and describe its operationalization within research and practice. Social position shapes individuals' unequal experiences of the social determinants of health. Thus, in our formulation, precision public health investigates how multiple dimensions of social position interact to confer health risk differently for precisely defined population subgroups according to the social contexts in which they are embedded, while considering relevant biological and behavioural factors. It leverages this information to uncover the precise and intersecting social structures that pattern health outcomes, and to identify actionable interventions within the social contexts of affected groups. We contend that studies informed by this framework offer greater potential to improve health than current conceptualizations of precision public health that do not address root causes. Moreover, expanding beyond master categories of social position and operationalizing these categories in more precise ways across time and place can enrich public health research through greater attention to the heterogeneity of social positions, their causes and health effects, leading to identification of points of intervention that are specific enough to be useful in reducing health inequities. Failure to attend to this level of particularity may mask the true nature of health risk, the causal mechanisms at play and appropriate interventions. Conceptualized thus, precision public health is a research endeavour with much to offer by way of understanding and intervening on the causes of poor health and health inequities.

Precision public health: Mapping socioeconomic disparities in opioid dispensations at Swedish pharmacies by Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (MAIHDA)

BACKGROUND

In light of the opioid epidemic in the United States, there is growing concern about the use of opioids in Sweden as it may lead to misuse and overuse and, in turn, severe public health problems. However, little is known about the distribution of opioid use across different demographic and socioeconomic dimensions in the Swedish general population. Therefore, we applied an intersectional Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (MAIHDA), to obtain an improved mapping of the risk heterogeneity of and socioeconomic inequalities in opioid prescription receipt.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Using data from 6,846,106 residents in Sweden aged 18 and above, we constructed 72 intersectional strata from combinations of gender, age, income, cohabitation status, and presence or absence of psychological distress. We modelled the absolute risk (AR) of opioid prescription receipt in a series of multilevel logistic regression models distinguishing between additive and interaction effects. By means of the Variance Partitioning Coefficient (VPC) and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), we quantified the discriminatory accuracy (DA) of the intersectional strata for discerning those who received opioid prescriptions from those who did not. The AR of opioid prescription receipt ranged from 2.77% (95% CI 2.69-2.86) among low-income men aged 18-34, living alone, without psychological distress, to 28.25% (95% CI 27.95-28.56) among medium-income women aged 65 and older, living alone, with psychological distress. In a model that conflated both additive and interaction effects, the intersectional strata had a fair DA for discerning opioid users from non-users (VPC = 13.2%, AUC = 0.68). However, in the model that decomposed total effects into additive and interaction effects, the VPC was very low (0.42%) indicating the existence of small interaction effects for a number of the intersectional strata.

CONCLUSIONS

The intersectional MAIHDA approach aligns with the aims of precision public health, through improving the evidence base for health policy by increasing understanding of both health inequalities and individual heterogeneity. This approach is particularly relevant for socioeconomically conditioned outcomes such as opioid prescription receipt. We have identified intersections of social position within the Swedish population at greater risk for opioid prescription receipt.

In defense of a population-level approach to prevention: why public health matters today

A focus on populations, and a corresponding population-level approach to intervention, is a foundation of public health and is one reason why public health matters today. Yet, there are indications that this foundation is being challenged. In some policy and practice domains, and alongside growing concern about the social determinants of health and health equity, there has been a shift from a population-level or universal approach to intervention, to a targeted approach focusing on those experiencing social or economic vulnerability. More than 30 years ago, Geoffrey Rose articulated strengths and limitations of population-level and high-risk approaches to prevention. In light of a strong analogy between "high risk" and "targeted" approaches, it seems timely, in a forum on why public health matters today, to revisit Rose's points. Focusing on points of overlap between strengths and limitations of the two approaches as described in public health (population-level; high-risk) and social policy (universal; targeted), I illustrate strengths of a population-level approach from the point of view of health equity. Although different circumstances call for different intervention approaches, recent discourse about the weakening of public health suggests that there is value in discussing foundations of the field, such as the population-level approach, that we as a community may wish to defend.