Current American Thoracic Society (ATS) standards promote the use of race and ethnicity-specific reference equations for pulmonary function test (PFT) interpretation. There is rising concern that the use of race and ethnicity in PFT interpretation contributes to a false view of fixed differences between races and may mask the effects of differential exposures. This use of race and ethnicity may contribute to health disparities by norming differences in pulmonary function. In the United States and globally, race serves as a social construct that is based on appearance and reflects social values, structures, and practices. Classification of people into racial and ethnic groups differs geographically and temporally. These considerations challenge the notion that racial and ethnic categories have biological meaning and question the use of race in PFT interpretation. The ATS convened a diverse group of clinicians and investigators for a workshop in 2021 to evaluate the use of race and ethnicity in PFT interpretation. Review of evidence published since then that challenges current practice and continued discussion concluded with a recommendation to replace race and ethnicity-specific equations with race-neutral average reference equations, which must be accompanied with a broader re-evaluation of how PFTs are used to make clinical, employment, and insurance decisions. There was also a call to engage key stakeholders not represented in this workshop and a statement of caution regarding the uncertain effects and potential harms of this change. Other recommendations include continued research and education to understand the impact of the change, to improve the evidence for the use of PFTs in general, and to identify modifiable risk factors for reduced pulmonary function.

The Coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionally impacted historically disadvantaged populations, with infection and mortality rates among Black and Latinx Americans far exceeding the proportion of the population that these groups represent. We, as researchers, educators, and critical care and pulmonary providers on the frontline of care for all individuals, believe it is important to reflect on the root causes for these striking disparities. Moreover, recent incidences of structural violence highlight the need to recognize the critical role of racism in causing and perpetuating health disparities. Without attention to the underlying causes, it is difficult to enact equitable action. Applying the World Health Organization Conceptual Framework for Action, we examine the social and structural determinants of health (SDOH) that contributed to disparities in the care and outcomes of patients with COVID-19. Applying this lens, we identify three potential critical targets for action: 1) increased exposure due to occupation and/or living circumstances that make social distancing and self-isolation more difficult, 2) limited access to accurate, up to date information regarding the health risks of COVID-19, and 3) limited and differential access to healthcare services, including coronavirus testing and care. In this perspective, we focus on action steps that we, as members of the American Thoracic Society, should take to actively change the status quo and influence policies that address root causes. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Background: Well-designed clinical research needs to obtain information that is applicable to the general population. However, most current studies fail to include substantial cohorts of racial/ethnic minority populations. Such underrepresentation may lead to delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis of disease, wide application of approved interventions without appropriate knowledge of their usefulness in certain populations, and development of recommendations that are not broadly applicable. Goals: To develop best practices for recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities for clinical research in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Methods: The American Thoracic Society convened a workshop in May of 2019. This included an international interprofessional group from academia, industry, the NIH, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, with expertise ranging from clinical and biomedical research to community-based participatory research methods and patient advocacy. Workshop participants addressed historical and current mistrust of scientific research, systemic bias, and social and structural barriers to minority participation in clinical research. A literature search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed to support conclusions. The search was not a systematic review of the literature. Results: Barriers at the individual, interpersonal, institutional, and federal/policy levels were identified as limiting to minority participation in clinical research. Through the use of a multilevel framework, workshop participants proposed evidence-based solutions to the identified barriers. Conclusions: To date, minority participation in clinical research is not representative of the U.S. and global populations. This American Thoracic Society research statement identifies potential evidence-based solutions by applying a multilevel framework that is anchored in community engagement methods and patient advocacy.