In recent decades, there has been remarkable growth in scientific research examining the multiple ways in which racism can adversely affect health. This interest has been driven in part by the striking persistence of racial/ethnic inequities in health and the empirical evidence that indicates that socioeconomic factors alone do not account for racial/ethnic inequities in health. Racism is considered a fundamental cause of adverse health outcomes for racial/ethnic minorities and racial/ethnic inequities in health. This article provides an overview of the evidence linking the primary domains of racism—structural racism, cultural racism, and individual-level discrimination—to mental and physical health outcomes. For each mechanism, we describe key findings and identify priorities for future research. We also discuss evidence for interventions to reduce racism and describe research needed to advance knowledge in this area.

Background: To provide an overview of the empirical research linking self‐reports of racial discrimination to health status and health service utilization.Methods: A review of literature reviews and meta‐analyses published from January 2013 to 2019 was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science. Articles were considered for inclusion using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) framework.Results: Twenty‐nine studies met the criteria for review. Both domestic and international studies find that experiences of discrimination reported by adults are adversely related to mental health and indicators of physical health, including preclinical indicators of disease, health behaviors, utilization of care, and adherence to medical regimens. Emerging evidence also suggests that discrimination can affect the health of children and adolescents and that at least some of its adverse effects may be ameliorated by the presence of psychosocial resources.Conclusions: Increasing evidence indicates that racial discrimination is an emerging risk factor for disease and a contributor to racial disparities in health. Attention is needed to strengthen research gaps and to advance our understanding of the optimal interventions that can reduce the negative effects of discrimination.

Antiracist health policy research requires methodological innovation that creates equity-centered and antiracist solutions to health inequities by centering the complexities and insidiousness of structural racism. The development of effective health policy and health equity interventions requires sound empirical characterization of the nature of structural racism and its impact on public health. However, there is a disconnect between the conceptualization and measurement of structural racism in the public health literature. Given that structural racism is a system of interconnected institutions that operates with a set of racialized rules that maintain White supremacy, how can anyone accurately measure its insidiousness? This article highlights methodological approaches that will move the field forward in its ability to validly measure structural racism for the purposes of achieving health equity. We identify three key areas that require scholarly attention to advance antiracist health policy research: historical context, geographical context, and theory-based novel quantitative and qualitative methods that capture the multifaceted and systemic properties of structural racism as well as other systems of oppression.

Objectives: With recent approval of standalone HPV testing and increasing uptake of HPV vaccination, some have postulated that we are moving toward a “post-Pap” era of cervical cancer prevention. However, the total number cases that have been prevented by Pap smear screening as well as its impact on racial disparities are unknown.Methods: We estimated national cervical cancer incidence from 1976 to 2009 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result database. Screening data were obtained from the literature and National Cancer Institute Progress Reports. We examined early, late, and race-specific trends in cancer incidence, and calculated the estimated number of cancers prevented over the past 3 decades.Results: From 1976 to 2009, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of early-stage cervical cancer, from 9.8 to 4.9 cases per 100,000 women (P<0.001). Late-stage disease incidence also decreased, from 5.3 to 3.7 cases per 100,000 women (P<0.001). The incidence among black women decreased from 26.9 to 9.7 cases per 100,000 women (P<0.001), a greater decline compared with that of white women and women of other races. After adjusting for “prescreening era” rates of cervical cancer, we estimate that Pap smears were associated with a reduction of between 105,000 and 492,000 cases of cervical cancer over the past 3 decades in the United States.Conclusions: A large number of early-stage and late-stage cervical cancers were prevented and racial disparity in cancer rates were reduced during an era of widespread Pap smear screening.

Surveillance and mortality data show large inequities in the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by race/ethnicity.¹ Currently, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not report mortality rates by race/ethnicity. Instead, the percentage distribution of COVID-19 deaths by race/ethnicity is presented alongside a weighted distribution of the population from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics,² which weights each county’s population by its share of COVID-19 deaths, not population (Figure). We investigated whether the resulting magnitude of inequities using the weighted population underestimates those observed using the total population (unweighted).

Background: Racial disparities have been reported in breast cancer care, yet little is known about disparities in access to gene expression profiling (GEP) tests. Given the impact of GEP test results, such as those of Oncotype DX (ODx), on treatment decision-making for hormone receptor–positive (HR+) breast cancer, it is particularly important to assess disparities in its use. Methods: We conducted a retrospective population-based study of 8,784 patients diagnosed with breast cancer in Connecticut during 2011 through 2013. We assessed the association between race, ethnicity, and ODx receipt among women with HR+ breast cancer for whom NCCN does and does not recommend ODx testing, using bivariate and multivariate logistic analyses. Results: We identified 5,294 women who met study inclusion criteria: 83.8% were white, 6.3% black, and 7.4% Hispanic. Overall, 50.9% (n=4,131) of women in the guideline-recommended group received ODx testing compared with 18.5% (n=1,163) in the nonrecommended group. More white women received the ODx test compared with black and Hispanic women in the recommended and nonrecommended groups (51.4% vs 44.6% and 47.7%; and 21.2% vs 9.0% and 9.7%, respectively). After adjusting for tumor and clinical characteristics, we observed significantly lower ODx use among black (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47–0.88) and Hispanic women (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45–0.77) compared with white women in the recommended group and in the guideline-discordant group (blacks: OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.20–0.78, and Hispanics: OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23–0.85). Conclusions: In this population-based study, we identified racial disparities in ODx testing. Disparities in access to innovative cancer care technologies may further exacerbate existing disparities in breast cancer outcomes.