Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Health North, Suite 301, 550 N 3rd Street, Phoenix, AZ, 85004, USA.
Department of Health and Exercise Science, University of Oklahoma, 1401 Asp Ave., Room 118, S.J. Sarkeys Complex, Norman, OK, 73019, USA; Research Center for Group Dynamics, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 426 Thompson Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48106, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2023 Mar;321:115785. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115785. Epub 2023 Feb 15.
Discrimination is a risk factor and potential pathway through which social determinants such as race and sex contribute to chronic inflammation in Black Americans in middle and later adulthood. Questions remain regarding which forms of discrimination are most salient for inflammatory dysregulation, and whether there are sex-based differences in these pathways.
This exploratory study investigates sex differences in the relationships between four forms of discrimination and inflammatory dysregulation among middle aged and older Black Americans.
Using cross-sectionally linked data from participants in the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS II) Survey (2004-2006) and Biomarker Project (2004-2009) (N = 225, ages 37-84, 67% female), this study conducted a series of multivariable regression analyses. Inflammatory burden was measured using a composite indicator comprised of five biomarkers: C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), fibrinogen, E-selectin, and intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM). Discrimination measures were lifetime, daily, and chronic job discrimination and perceived inequality at work.
Black men generally reported higher levels of discrimination than Black women (3 out of 4 forms), though only sex differences in job discrimination achieved statistical significance (p < .001). In contrast, Black women exhibited more overall inflammatory burden than Black men (2.09 vs. 1.66, p = .024), particularly elevated levels of fibrinogen (p = .003). Lifetime discrimination and inequality at work were associated with higher levels of inflammatory burden, after adjusting for demographic and health factors (p = .057 and p = .029, respectively). The discrimination-inflammation relationships further varied by sex, such that more lifetime and job discrimination predicted greater inflammatory burden in Black women, but not in Black men.
These findings highlight the potentially detrimental impact of discrimination and emphasize the importance of sex-specific research on biological mechanisms of health and health disparities in Black Americans.
歧视是一种风险因素,也是社会决定因素(如种族和性别)导致美国中老年人慢性炎症的潜在途径。目前仍不清楚哪些形式的歧视对炎症失调最为突出,以及这些途径是否存在性别差异。
本探索性研究调查了四种形式的歧视与美国中年和老年黑人炎症失调之间的关系在性别上的差异。
本研究使用了来自美国中年研究(MIDUS II)调查(2004-2006 年)和生物标志物项目(2004-2009 年)参与者的横断面链接数据(N=225,年龄 37-84 岁,67%为女性),进行了一系列多变量回归分析。使用由五种生物标志物组成的复合指标来衡量炎症负担:C 反应蛋白(CRP)、白细胞介素-6(IL-6)、纤维蛋白原、E-选择素和细胞间黏附分子(ICAM)。歧视措施包括终身、日常和慢性工作歧视以及工作中的不平等感知。
黑人男性普遍报告的歧视程度高于黑人女性(4 种形式中有 3 种),但只有工作歧视方面的性别差异具有统计学意义(p<0.001)。相比之下,黑人女性的总体炎症负担高于黑人男性(2.09 比 1.66,p=0.024),尤其是纤维蛋白原水平升高(p=0.003)。在调整人口统计学和健康因素后,终身歧视和工作中的不平等与更高的炎症负担相关(p=0.057 和 p=0.029)。歧视与炎症的关系进一步因性别而异,即更多的终身和工作歧视预测黑人女性的炎症负担更大,但对黑人男性则不然。
这些发现强调了歧视的潜在有害影响,并强调了针对美国黑人健康和健康差异的生物学机制进行性别特异性研究的重要性。