Tiwari Biplav Babu, McDowell Carlyncia, Roberts Omar-Shariff Sandy, Kogan Steven, Chen Zhuo Adam, Rajbhandari-Thapa Janani
Department of Health Policy and Management, College of Public Health, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA.
Department of Education Administration and Policy, Mary Frances Early College of Education, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA.
J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2024 Sep 16. doi: 10.1007/s40615-024-02179-7.
A lack of a "gold standard" operationalized index to measure structural racism (SR) in the current literature limits the comparison of the evidence available. This study aims to synthesize the measures of SR from the current literature to identify the measures used to date, study the indicators included, and investigate its expanding domain.
A literature search of original quantitative studies in the Google Scholar and PubMed databases for articles dated January 1, 2000-July 31, 2023, was conducted with search terms: ["Institutionalized Racism" OR "Systemic Racism", OR "Structural Racism"] AND "Health" AND "United States." The studies were summarized and extracted based on the type of SR index used, the domains of SR incorporated, and the health outcomes studied.
A total of 74 articles were included in the final review. The historical redlining score, G-statistics, index of concentration, and structural racism index were common quantifiable measures of SR. These indices capture 56 indicators across 11 significant domains to measure SR. Similarly, SR indices are being used mostly to study the impact of SR on cardiovascular diseases and other chronic health conditions, women's and maternal health-related issues, and COVID-19 outcomes.
Multiple indices have been developed to capture SR, and since the COVID-19 pandemic, we have observed an increased interest in understanding health disparities through the lens of SR. With the rise in evidence on experiences of minority races related to racism, there is a high need for a standard approach to measuring SR.
当前文献中缺乏用于衡量结构性种族主义（SR）的“金标准”可操作指标，这限制了对现有证据的比较。本研究旨在综合当前文献中的SR衡量方法，以确定迄今为止所使用的衡量方法，研究其中包含的指标，并探究其不断扩展的领域。
在谷歌学术和PubMed数据库中检索2000年1月1日至2023年7月31日期间发表的关于原始定量研究的文献，检索词为：["制度化种族主义" 或 "系统性种族主义"，或 "结构性种族主义"] 以及 "健康" 和 "美国"。根据所使用的SR指数类型、纳入的SR领域以及所研究的健康结果对这些研究进行总结和提取。
最终综述共纳入74篇文章。历史红线评分、G统计量、集中度指数和结构性种族主义指数是常见的SR可量化衡量方法。这些指数涵盖了11个重要领域的56个指标来衡量SR。同样，SR指数主要用于研究SR对心血管疾病和其他慢性健康状况、妇女及孕产妇健康相关问题以及新冠疫情结果的影响。
已经开发了多种指数来衡量SR，自新冠疫情以来，我们观察到人们对通过SR视角理解健康差异的兴趣有所增加。随着与种族主义相关的少数族裔经历的证据不断增加，迫切需要一种衡量SR的标准方法。
