The reporting of race and ethnicity information in the dental public health literature

Systematic review of how racialized health inequities are addressed in Epidemiologic Reviews articles (1979-2021): a critical conceptual and empirical content analysis and recommendations for best practices

Critical analysis of the determinants of current and changing racialized health inequities, including the central role of racism, is an urgent priority for epidemiology, for both original research studies and epidemiologic review articles. Motivating our systematic overview review of Epidemiologic Reviews articles is the critical role of epidemiologic reviews in shaping discourse, research priorities, and policy relevant to the social patterning of population health. Our approach was first to document the number of articles published in Epidemiologic Reviews (1979-2021; n = 685) that either: (1) focused the review on racism and health, racial discrimination and health, or racialized health inequities (n = 27; 4%); (2) mentioned racialized groups but did not focus on racism or racialized health inequities (n = 399; 59%); or (3) included no mention of racialized groups or racialized health inequities (n = 250; 37%). We then conducted a critical content analysis of the 27 review articles that focused on racialized health inequities and assessed key characteristics, including (1) concepts, terms, and metrics used regarding racism and racialized groups (notably only 26% addressed the use or nonuse of measures explicitly linked to racism; 15% provided explicit definitions of racialized groups); (2) theories of disease distribution guiding (explicitly or implicitly) the review's approach; (3) interpretation of findings; and (4) recommendations offered. Guided by our results, we offer recommendations for best practices for epidemiologic review articles for addressing how epidemiologic research does or does not address ubiquitous racialized health inequities.

Research on racial/ethnic inequities in oral health over the past 80 years: The role of racism

AIM

This study aims to (1) describe trends in explanations provided for racial/ethnic inequities in dental caries and periodontitis, and (2) explore the patterns of relatedness among explanations for these inequities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Highly cited publications based on studies indexed in the Scopus database were retrieved and assessed for eligibility. Explanations for racial/ethnic inequities were classified into eight different, but interrelated domains. We assessed trends and examined the relations among explanations using multiple correspondence analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 200 articles among the most cited publications were selected. The proportion of studies invoking racism as an explanation for racial inequities in oral health increased from 0% to 14.3%, from 1937 to 2020. The proportions of individual socio-economic factors increased from 52.0% to 82.9%, and dental care from 28.0% to 62.9%. The remaining explanations were stable: psychological/behavioural processes (62.5%), biological factors (49.5%), contextual/area-level effects (24.0%) and immigrant paradox (4.0%). Multiple correspondence analysis revealed a smaller axial distance between racism and the following categories: studies from Brazil, recent publications and Blacks/Hispanics/mixed-race groups. Publications about immigrants were axially closer to the high-income countries category.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings call on dental researchers to consider racism as a cause for existing racial/ethnic inequities in oral health.

Race and ethnicity reporting in endometrial cancer literature

OBJECTIVES

There is evidence that there are differences in survival outcomes among patients with endometrial cancer of different ethnic groups. We aimed to assess the quantity and quality of race/ethnicity reporting in the literature on endometrial cancer published from January 2020 to December 2020.

METHODS

In this systematic review, electronic searches of PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Sciences, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were performed for all articles published in 2020. A total of 3330 articles were reviewed, of which 949 (35%) peer-reviewed human-based articles focusing on endometrial cancer were included. Non-research-focused articles, review articles, meta-analyses, case reports, and non-human studies were excluded. We analyzed the proportion of studies reporting race/ethnicity and assessed the quality of reporting with regard to the adherence to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations. We evaluated the influence of study characteristics on race/ethnicity reporting and compared articles published in journals which adhere to the ICMJE recommendations against those that did not explicitly state that they did.

RESULTS

Of the 949 (28.5%) included articles, 166 (17.5%) reported race/ethnicity of patients, with low quality of reporting. The reporting rate of race/ethnicity was similar when comparing articles from ICMJE and non-ICMJE journals (62 (20.4%) vs 104 (16.1%); p=0.11), prospective versus retrospective studies (53 (22.7%) vs 113 (15.8%); p=0.02), and national versus international studies (147 (17.5%) vs 19 (17.4%); p=0.99). Studies performed in the WHO region of Americas were significantly more consistent in reporting race compared with other regions (119 (44.7%) vs 23 (6.8%) European, 2 (7.4%) Eastern Mediterranean, 21 (7.1%) Western Pacific, 0 (0%) South-East Asia; p<0.001). Female corresponding authors were significantly more consistent in reporting race than male authors (94 (22.5%) vs 72 (13.6%); p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Human-based articles focusing on endometrial cancer have a low frequency and quality of race/ethnicity reporting, even in journals claiming to follow ICMJE recommendations.

Race in public health dentistry: a critical review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a critical review of the literature on the use of race, color, and ethnicity in the field of public health dentistry.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed for articles published between 2014 and 2019. Using a data extraction form, we collected information on (1) bibliographic characteristics of the selected papers; (2) race, color, and ethnicity of the study participants and their sociodemographic profiles; and (3) the extent to which the original publications followed the recommendations by Kaplan and Bennett (2003) on the use of race, color, or ethnicity in biomedical research.

RESULTS

Our initial search identified 2,032 articles, 53 of which were selected for full-text examination and assessment following pre-established eligibility criteria. Around 60% (n = 32) of the included studies did not justify the use of race, color, or ethnicity in their analyses, and 9% (n = 5) took these variables as indicators of the participants’ genetic makeup. On the other hand, 68% (n = 36) of the reviewed papers considered race, color, and ethnicity as risk markers – not risk factors – for adverse oral health outcomes, whereas 80% (n = 42) adjusted racial/ethnic inequities for a range of socioeconomic and demographic factors in statistical models. Only one study (2%) explicitly took race, color, or ethnicity as a contextually dependent dimension of the participants’ identities.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that research on oral health inequities is often based on reductionist and stigmatizing conceptions of race, color, or ethnicity. Such harmful misconceptions should be replaced with anti-racist narratives in order to effectively address racial oral health inequities.

A Global Perspective of Racial-Ethnic Inequities in Dental Caries: Protocol of Systematic Review

Though current evidence suggests that racial-ethnic inequities in dental caries persist over time and across space, their magnitude is currently unknown from a global perspective. This systematic review aims to quantify the magnitude of racial/ethnic inequities in dental caries and to deconstruct the different taxonomies/concepts/methods used for racial/ethnic categorization across different populations/nations. This review has been registered in PROSPERO; CRD42021282771. An electronic search of all relevant databases will be conducted until December 2021 for both published and unpublished literature. Studies will be eligible if they include data on the prevalence or severity of dental caries assessed by the decayed, missing, filled teeth index (DMFT), according to indicators of race-ethnicity. A narrative synthesis of included studies and a random-effects meta-analysis will be conducted. Forest plots will be constructed to assess the difference in effect size for the occurrence of dental caries. Study quality will be determined via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the GRADE approach will be used for assessing the quality of evidence. This systematic review will enhance knowledge of the magnitude of racial/ethnic inequities in dental caries globally by providing important benchmark data on which to base interventions to mitigate the problem and to visualize the effects of racism on oral health.

Racial Inequalities in Oral Health

Together with other social categories, race has been at the core of much scholarly work in the area of humanities and social sciences, as well as a host of applied disciplines. In dentistry, debates have ranged from the use of race as a criterion for the recommendation of specific dental procedures to a means of assessing inequalities in a variety of outcomes. What is missing in these previous discussions, though, is a broader understanding of race that transcends relations with genetic makeup and other individual-level characteristics. In this review, we provide readers with a critique of the existing knowledge on race and oral health by answering the following 3 guiding questions: (1) What concepts and ideas are connected with race in the field of dentistry? (2) What can be learned and what is absent from the existing literature on the topic? (3) How can we enhance research and policy on racial inequalities in oral health? Taken together, the reviewed studies rely either on biological distinctions between racial categories or on other individual characteristics that may underlie racial disparities in oral health. Amidst a range of individual-level factors, racial inequalities have often been attributed to lower socioeconomic status and “health-damaging” cultural traits, for instance, patterns of and reasons for dental visits, dietary habits, and oral hygiene behaviors. While this literature has been useful in documenting large and persistent racial gaps in oral health, wider sociohistorical processes, such as systemic racism, as well as their relationships with economic exploitation, social stigmatization, and political marginalization, have yet to be operationalized among studies on the topic. A nascent body of research has recently begun to address some of these factors, but limited attention to structural theories of racism means that many more studies are needed to effectively mitigate racial health differentials.

Reported characteristics of participants in physical therapy-related clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The inclusion of sociodemographic and anthropometric variables in published clinical trials enables physical therapists to determine the applicability of trial results to patients in their clinics.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the reporting of participant sociodemographic and anthropometric characteristics in published physical therapy-related clinical trials.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of clinical trials from 2 samples drawn from literature applicable to physical therapy.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently extracted data from a random sample of 152 clinical trials from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and a purposive sample of 85 clinical trials published in the journal Physical Therapy (PTJ). A database containing the occurrence of sociodemographic (age, sex, race/ethnicity, level of education, marital status) and anthropometric variables (height, weight, body mass index) in each article was created to generate descriptive statistics about both samples.

RESULTS

Among the sociodemographic variables, at least 90% of articles reported the sex and age of trial participants. Additional sociodemographic characteristics that were reported in 20% to 26% of articles were participant level of education and participant race/ethnicity. The reporting of anthropometric data differed between the 2 samples, with body mass index being most commonly reported in the PEDro sample (48.0%) and weight being most commonly reported in the PTJ sample (38.8%).

LIMITATIONS

Articles reviewed were limited by year of publication (from 2008 to 2012 for PTJ articles and 2010 for clinical trials from PEDro) and to English-language-only literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The physical therapy literature would benefit from enhanced reporting requirements for both sociodemographic and anthropometric data about participants.