Rania Ali , Carmen Daniel , Tiffany Duque , Nila Sathe , Ana Beatriz Pizarro , Alexander Rabre , Danielle Henderson , Janelle Armstrong-Brown , Damian K. Francis , Vivian Welch , Patricia C. Heyn , Omar Dewidar , Anita Rizvi , Meera Viswanathan
{"title":"Centering racial health equity in systematic reviews paper 2: themes from semistructured interviews","authors":"Rania Ali , Carmen Daniel , Tiffany Duque , Nila Sathe , Ana Beatriz Pizarro , Alexander Rabre , Danielle Henderson , Janelle Armstrong-Brown , Damian K. Francis , Vivian Welch , Patricia C. Heyn , Omar Dewidar , Anita Rizvi , Meera Viswanathan","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>In the context of profound and persistent racial health inequities, we sought to understand how to define racial health equity in the context of systematic reviews and how to staff, conduct, disseminate, sustain, and evaluate systematic reviews that address racial health equity.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design and Setting</h3><div>The study consisted of virtual, semistructured interviews followed by structured coding and qualitative analyses using NVivo.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty-nine individuals, primarily United States–based, including patients, community representatives, systematic reviewers, clinicians, guideline developers, primary researchers, and funders, participated in this study. These interest holders brought up systems of power, injustice, social determinants of health, and intersectionality when conceptualizing racial health equity. They also emphasized including community members with lived experience in review teams. They suggested making changes to systematic review scope, methods, and eligible evidence (such as adapting review methods to include racial health equity considerations in prioritizing topics for reviews, formulating key questions and searches, and specifying outcomes) and broadening evidence to include designs that address implementation and access. Interest holders noted that sustained efforts to center racial health equity in systematic reviews require resources, time, training, and demonstrating value to funders.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Interest holders identified changes to the funding, staffing, conduct, dissemination, and implementation of systematic reviews to center racial health equity. Action on these steps requires clear standards for success, an evidence base to support transformative changes, and consensus among interest holders on the way forward.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"176 ","pages":"Article 111574"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435624003305","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
In the context of profound and persistent racial health inequities, we sought to understand how to define racial health equity in the context of systematic reviews and how to staff, conduct, disseminate, sustain, and evaluate systematic reviews that address racial health equity.
Study Design and Setting
The study consisted of virtual, semistructured interviews followed by structured coding and qualitative analyses using NVivo.
Results
Twenty-nine individuals, primarily United States–based, including patients, community representatives, systematic reviewers, clinicians, guideline developers, primary researchers, and funders, participated in this study. These interest holders brought up systems of power, injustice, social determinants of health, and intersectionality when conceptualizing racial health equity. They also emphasized including community members with lived experience in review teams. They suggested making changes to systematic review scope, methods, and eligible evidence (such as adapting review methods to include racial health equity considerations in prioritizing topics for reviews, formulating key questions and searches, and specifying outcomes) and broadening evidence to include designs that address implementation and access. Interest holders noted that sustained efforts to center racial health equity in systematic reviews require resources, time, training, and demonstrating value to funders.
Conclusion
Interest holders identified changes to the funding, staffing, conduct, dissemination, and implementation of systematic reviews to center racial health equity. Action on these steps requires clear standards for success, an evidence base to support transformative changes, and consensus among interest holders on the way forward.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology strives to enhance the quality of clinical and patient-oriented healthcare research by advancing and applying innovative methods in conducting, presenting, synthesizing, disseminating, and translating research results into optimal clinical practice. Special emphasis is placed on training new generations of scientists and clinical practice leaders.