Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Center for Antiracism Research for Health Equity, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Epidemiol Rev. 2024 Sep 16;46(1):1-26. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxae002.
Progress toward racial health equity cannot be made if we cannot measure its fundamental driver: structural racism. As in other epidemiologic studies, the first step is to measure the exposure. But how to measure structural racism is an ongoing debate. To characterize the approaches epidemiologists and other health researchers use to quantitatively measure structural racism, highlight methodological innovations, and identify gaps in the literature, we conducted a scoping review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature published during 2019-2021 to accompany the 2018 published work of Groos et al., in which they surveyed the scope of structural racism measurement up to 2017. We identified several themes from the recent literature: the current predominant focus on measuring anti-Black racism; using residential segregation as well as other segregation-driven measures as proxies of structural racism; measuring structural racism as spatial exposures; increasing calls by epidemiologists and other health researchers to measure structural racism as a multidimensional, multilevel determinant of health and related innovations; the development of policy databases; the utility of simulated counterfactual approaches in the understanding of how structural racism drives racial health inequities; and the lack of measures of antiracism and limited work on later life effects. Our findings sketch out several steps to improve the science related to structural racism measurements, which is key to advancing antiracism policies.
结构性种族主义,就无法实现种族健康公平的进展。与其他流行病学研究一样,第一步是衡量暴露程度。但是,如何衡量结构性种族主义是一个正在进行的辩论。为了描述流行病学家和其他健康研究人员用于定量衡量结构性种族主义的方法,突出方法学创新,并确定文献中的差距,我们对 2019-2021 年期间发表的同行评议和灰色文献进行了范围审查,以补充 2018 年 Groos 等人发表的工作,他们在该工作中调查了截至 2017 年结构性种族主义测量的范围。我们从最近的文献中确定了几个主题:目前主要关注衡量反黑人种族主义;使用居住隔离以及其他隔离驱动措施作为结构性种族主义的代表;将结构性种族主义作为空间暴露来衡量;越来越多的流行病学家和其他健康研究人员呼吁将结构性种族主义作为健康和相关创新的多维、多层次决定因素来衡量;政策数据库的发展;模拟反事实方法在理解结构性种族主义如何导致种族健康不平等方面的效用;以及缺乏反种族主义措施和对晚年影响的有限工作。我们的发现勾勒出了几个步骤,以改进与结构性种族主义测量相关的科学,这是推进反种族主义政策的关键。