种族/民族在心理健康治疗干预的实验试验中的差异参与:系统回顾。

Peter C Lam, Danielle Simpson, Dolly A John, Micaela Rodriguez, David Bridgman-Packer, Amanda Gabrielle Cruz, Maeve A O'Neill, Roberto Lewis-Fernández
{"title":"种族/民族在心理健康治疗干预的实验试验中的差异参与:系统回顾。","authors":"Peter C Lam,&nbsp;Danielle Simpson,&nbsp;Dolly A John,&nbsp;Micaela Rodriguez,&nbsp;David Bridgman-Packer,&nbsp;Amanda Gabrielle Cruz,&nbsp;Maeve A O'Neill,&nbsp;Roberto Lewis-Fernández","doi":"10.4088/JCP.21r14343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> Research on mental health interventions, largely from observational studies, suggests that individuals who are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) have lower treatment engagement than non-Latino Whites. This systematic review focuses on prospective, experimental treatment trials, which reduce variability in patient and intervention characteristics and some access barriers (eg, cost), to examine the association of race/ethnicity and engagement.</p><p><p><b><i>Data Sources:</i></b> A systematic search of PubMed and PsycINFO through May 2020 using terms covering mental health treatment, engagement, and race/ethnicity.</p><p><p><b><i>Study Selection:</i></b> US-based, English-language, prospective experimental (including quasi-experimental) trials of adults treated for <i>DSM</i>-defined mental disorders were included. Studies had to compare engagement (treatment initiation and retention, medication adherence) across 2 or more ethnoracial groups. Fifty-five of 2,520 articles met inclusion criteria.</p><p><p><b><i>Data Extraction:</i></b> Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Collaboration bias-risk assessment tool were used to report study findings.</p><p><p><b><i>Results:</i></b> Twenty-nine articles (53%) reported significant ethnoracial engagement differences, of which 93% found lower engagement among BIPOC groups compared largely to non-Latino Whites. The proportion of significant findings was consistent across quality of studies, covariate adjustments, ethnoracial groups, disorders, treatments, and 4 engagement definitions. Reporting limitations were found in covariate analyses and disaggregation of results across specific ethnoracial groups.</p><p><p><b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Prospective experimental treatment trials reveal consistently lower BIPOC engagement, suggesting persisting disparities despite standardized study designs. Future research should improve inclusion of understudied groups, examine covariates systematically, and follow uniform reporting and analytic practices to elucidate reasons for these disparities.</p>","PeriodicalId":516853,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differential Engagement by Race/Ethnicity in Experimental Trials of Mental Health Treatment Interventions: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Peter C Lam,&nbsp;Danielle Simpson,&nbsp;Dolly A John,&nbsp;Micaela Rodriguez,&nbsp;David Bridgman-Packer,&nbsp;Amanda Gabrielle Cruz,&nbsp;Maeve A O'Neill,&nbsp;Roberto Lewis-Fernández\",\"doi\":\"10.4088/JCP.21r14343\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> Research on mental health interventions, largely from observational studies, suggests that individuals who are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) have lower treatment engagement than non-Latino Whites. This systematic review focuses on prospective, experimental treatment trials, which reduce variability in patient and intervention characteristics and some access barriers (eg, cost), to examine the association of race/ethnicity and engagement.</p><p><p><b><i>Data Sources:</i></b> A systematic search of PubMed and PsycINFO through May 2020 using terms covering mental health treatment, engagement, and race/ethnicity.</p><p><p><b><i>Study Selection:</i></b> US-based, English-language, prospective experimental (including quasi-experimental) trials of adults treated for <i>DSM</i>-defined mental disorders were included. Studies had to compare engagement (treatment initiation and retention, medication adherence) across 2 or more ethnoracial groups. Fifty-five of 2,520 articles met inclusion criteria.</p><p><p><b><i>Data Extraction:</i></b> Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Collaboration bias-risk assessment tool were used to report study findings.</p><p><p><b><i>Results:</i></b> Twenty-nine articles (53%) reported significant ethnoracial engagement differences, of which 93% found lower engagement among BIPOC groups compared largely to non-Latino Whites. The proportion of significant findings was consistent across quality of studies, covariate adjustments, ethnoracial groups, disorders, treatments, and 4 engagement definitions. Reporting limitations were found in covariate analyses and disaggregation of results across specific ethnoracial groups.</p><p><p><b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Prospective experimental treatment trials reveal consistently lower BIPOC engagement, suggesting persisting disparities despite standardized study designs. Future research should improve inclusion of understudied groups, examine covariates systematically, and follow uniform reporting and analytic practices to elucidate reasons for these disparities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":516853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.21r14343\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.21r14343","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:主要来自观察性研究的心理健康干预研究表明,黑人、土著和有色人种(BIPOC)个体的治疗参与度低于非拉丁裔白人。本系统综述侧重于前瞻性实验性治疗试验,这些试验减少了患者和干预特征的可变性以及一些准入障碍(如成本),以检查种族/民族与参与的关系。数据来源:系统搜索PubMed和PsycINFO到2020年5月,使用涵盖心理健康治疗、参与和种族/民族的术语。研究选择:纳入美国、英语、前瞻性实验(包括准实验)的成人dsm定义的精神障碍治疗试验。研究必须比较两个或更多种族群体的参与(治疗开始和保持,药物依从性)。2520篇文章中有55篇符合纳入标准。数据提取:系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目和Cochrane协作偏倚风险评估工具被用于报告研究结果。结果:29篇文章(53%)报告了显著的种族参与度差异,其中93%的文章发现,与非拉丁裔白人相比,BIPOC群体的参与度较低。重大发现的比例在研究质量、协变量调整、种族群体、疾病、治疗和4种参与定义中是一致的。在协变量分析和跨特定种族群体的结果分类中发现了报告的局限性。结论:前瞻性实验治疗试验显示持续较低的BIPOC参与,这表明尽管标准化研究设计,差异仍然存在。未来的研究应进一步纳入未充分研究的群体,系统地检查协变量,并遵循统一的报告和分析实践来阐明这些差异的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Differential Engagement by Race/Ethnicity in Experimental Trials of Mental Health Treatment Interventions: A Systematic Review.

Objective: Research on mental health interventions, largely from observational studies, suggests that individuals who are Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) have lower treatment engagement than non-Latino Whites. This systematic review focuses on prospective, experimental treatment trials, which reduce variability in patient and intervention characteristics and some access barriers (eg, cost), to examine the association of race/ethnicity and engagement.

Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed and PsycINFO through May 2020 using terms covering mental health treatment, engagement, and race/ethnicity.

Study Selection: US-based, English-language, prospective experimental (including quasi-experimental) trials of adults treated for DSM-defined mental disorders were included. Studies had to compare engagement (treatment initiation and retention, medication adherence) across 2 or more ethnoracial groups. Fifty-five of 2,520 articles met inclusion criteria.

Data Extraction: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Collaboration bias-risk assessment tool were used to report study findings.

Results: Twenty-nine articles (53%) reported significant ethnoracial engagement differences, of which 93% found lower engagement among BIPOC groups compared largely to non-Latino Whites. The proportion of significant findings was consistent across quality of studies, covariate adjustments, ethnoracial groups, disorders, treatments, and 4 engagement definitions. Reporting limitations were found in covariate analyses and disaggregation of results across specific ethnoracial groups.

Conclusions: Prospective experimental treatment trials reveal consistently lower BIPOC engagement, suggesting persisting disparities despite standardized study designs. Future research should improve inclusion of understudied groups, examine covariates systematically, and follow uniform reporting and analytic practices to elucidate reasons for these disparities.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信