美国死胎中的种族和民族不平等:逆流而上,缩小差距

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Michelle P Debbink , Kaitlyn K. Stanhope , Carol J.R. Hogue
{"title":"美国死胎中的种族和民族不平等:逆流而上,缩小差距","authors":"Michelle P Debbink ,&nbsp;Kaitlyn K. Stanhope ,&nbsp;Carol J.R. Hogue","doi":"10.1016/j.semperi.2023.151865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Though stillbirth<span> rates in the United States improved over the previous decades, inequities in stillbirth by race and ethnicity have persisted nearly unchanged since data collection began. Black and Indigenous pregnant people face a two-fold greater risk of experiencing the devastating consequences of stillbirth compared to their White counterparts. Because race is a social rather than biological construct, inequities in stillbirth rates are a downstream consequence of structural, institutional, and interpersonal racism which shape a landscape of differential access to opportunities for health. These downstream consequences can include differences in the prevalence of chronic health conditions as well as structural differences in the quality of health care or healthy neighborhood conditions, each of which likely plays a role in racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth. Research and intervention approaches that utilize an equity lens may identify ways to close gaps in stillbirth incidence or in responding to the health and socioemotional consequences of stillbirth. A community-engaged approach that incorporates experiential wisdom will be necessary to create a full picture of the causes and consequences of inequity in stillbirth outcomes. Investigators working in tandem with community partners, utilizing a combination of qualitative, quantitative, and implementation science approaches, may more fully elucidate the underpinnings of racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth outcomes.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":21761,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in perinatology","volume":"48 1","pages":"Article 151865"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth in the US: Looking upstream to close the gap\",\"authors\":\"Michelle P Debbink ,&nbsp;Kaitlyn K. Stanhope ,&nbsp;Carol J.R. Hogue\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.semperi.2023.151865\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Though stillbirth<span> rates in the United States improved over the previous decades, inequities in stillbirth by race and ethnicity have persisted nearly unchanged since data collection began. Black and Indigenous pregnant people face a two-fold greater risk of experiencing the devastating consequences of stillbirth compared to their White counterparts. Because race is a social rather than biological construct, inequities in stillbirth rates are a downstream consequence of structural, institutional, and interpersonal racism which shape a landscape of differential access to opportunities for health. These downstream consequences can include differences in the prevalence of chronic health conditions as well as structural differences in the quality of health care or healthy neighborhood conditions, each of which likely plays a role in racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth. Research and intervention approaches that utilize an equity lens may identify ways to close gaps in stillbirth incidence or in responding to the health and socioemotional consequences of stillbirth. A community-engaged approach that incorporates experiential wisdom will be necessary to create a full picture of the causes and consequences of inequity in stillbirth outcomes. Investigators working in tandem with community partners, utilizing a combination of qualitative, quantitative, and implementation science approaches, may more fully elucidate the underpinnings of racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth outcomes.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21761,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in perinatology\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 151865\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146000523001684\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146000523001684","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管美国的死胎率在过去几十年中有所改善,但自数据收集工作开始以来,按种族和族裔划分的死胎不平等现象几乎没有改变。与白人孕妇相比,黑人和原住民孕妇面临死产毁灭性后果的风险要高出两倍。由于种族是一种社会结构而非生物结构,死胎率的不平等是结构性、制度性和人际间种族主义的下游后果,这种种族主义造成了获得健康机会的差异。这些下游后果可能包括慢性健康状况流行率的差异,以及医疗保健质量或健康社区条件的结构性差异,其中每一种都可能在死胎的种族和民族不平等中发挥作用。采用公平视角的研究和干预方法可以找出缩小死胎发生率差距或应对死胎造成的健康和社会情感后果的方法。要全面了解死产结果不公平的原因和后果,就必须采用一种融入经验智慧的社区参与式方法。研究人员与社区伙伴合作,综合利用定性、定量和实施科学方法,可能会更全面地阐明死产结果中种族和民族不平等的根本原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth in the US: Looking upstream to close the gap

Though stillbirth rates in the United States improved over the previous decades, inequities in stillbirth by race and ethnicity have persisted nearly unchanged since data collection began. Black and Indigenous pregnant people face a two-fold greater risk of experiencing the devastating consequences of stillbirth compared to their White counterparts. Because race is a social rather than biological construct, inequities in stillbirth rates are a downstream consequence of structural, institutional, and interpersonal racism which shape a landscape of differential access to opportunities for health. These downstream consequences can include differences in the prevalence of chronic health conditions as well as structural differences in the quality of health care or healthy neighborhood conditions, each of which likely plays a role in racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth. Research and intervention approaches that utilize an equity lens may identify ways to close gaps in stillbirth incidence or in responding to the health and socioemotional consequences of stillbirth. A community-engaged approach that incorporates experiential wisdom will be necessary to create a full picture of the causes and consequences of inequity in stillbirth outcomes. Investigators working in tandem with community partners, utilizing a combination of qualitative, quantitative, and implementation science approaches, may more fully elucidate the underpinnings of racial and ethnic inequities in stillbirth outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in perinatology
Seminars in perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
97
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The purpose of each issue of Seminars in Perinatology is to provide authoritative and comprehensive reviews of a single topic of interest to professionals who care for the mother, the fetus, and the newborn. The journal''s readership includes perinatologists, obstetricians, pediatricians, epidemiologists, students in these fields, and others. Each issue offers a comprehensive review of an individual topic, with emphasis on new developments that will have a direct impact on their practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信