Patient race/ethnicity, age, gender and education are not related to preference for or response to disclosure

The initial response to a crisis typically depends on the executive branch of government, because they may act more rapidly than legislative and judicial branches. For COVID-19 in particular, the focal decision-makers have been the president and the governors of the 50 states. In the eyes of the public, how have the president and governors responded?We surveyed 22,501 individuals across all 50 states plus the District of Columbia. The survey was conducted on 12-28 June 2020 by PureSpectrum via an online, nonprobability sample, with state-level representative quotas for race/ethnicity, age, and gender (for methodological details on the other waves, see covidstates.org). In addition to balancing on these dimensions, we reweighted our data using demographic characteristics to match the U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, age, gender, and education. This was the fifth in a series of surveys we have been conducting since April 2020, examining attitudes and behaviors regarding COVID-19 in the United States.

Download Full-text

Gender, Justice, and Equity in Education

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.131 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Elisabet Öhrn ◽

Gaby Weiner

Keyword(s):

Social Class ◽

Gender Justice ◽

Female Masculinity ◽

Equity In Education ◽

School Practices ◽

Gender And Education ◽

Key Topics ◽

Race Ethnicity

The field known as gender and education emerged in the 1970s, and currently addresses a range of issues of equity and justice in education with the widespread incorporation of “intersectionality” (i.e., the interlocking nature of gender and other categorizations such as social class, race, ethnicity, sexualities, disability). The topics and practices constituting the field have changed over the years, as demonstrated in a survey by the authors of Gender and Education, the main journal of choice for those working in the field. Key topics addressed by researchers include patterns of examination achievement, curriculum and school practices, and the variety of femininities and masculinities produced with/in schooling and education. Overarching themes on the conduct of the field include decreased focus on practice and action, increased emphasis on theorization, critique of the dualisms on which the field is based (girl/boy, male/female, masculinity/femininity), and Anglophone and Western bias.

Download Full-text

The influence of patient race on the use of diagnostic imaging in United States emergency departments: data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care survey

BMC Health Services Research ◽

10.1186/s12913-020-05698-1 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Andrew B. Ross ◽

Vivek Kalia ◽

Brian Y. Chan ◽

Geng Li

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Health Care ◽

Emergency Department ◽

Diagnostic Imaging ◽

Race And Ethnicity ◽

National Hospital ◽

Patient Race ◽

Care Survey ◽

Race Ethnicity ◽

Ambulatory Medical Care

Abstract Background An established body of literature has shown evidence of implicit bias in the health care system on the basis of patient race and ethnicity that contributes to well documented disparities in outcomes. However, little is known about the influence of patient race and ethnicity on the decision to order diagnostic radiology exams in the acute care setting. This study examines the role of patient race and ethnicity on the likelihood of diagnostic imaging exams being ordered during United States emergency department encounters. Methods Publicly available data from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey Emergency Department sample for the years 2006–2016 was compiled. The proportion of patient encounters where diagnostic imaging was ordered was tabulated by race/ethnicity, sub-divided by imaging modality. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the influence of patient race/ethnicity on the ordering of diagnostic imaging controlling for other patient and hospital characteristics. Survey weighting variables were used to formulate national-level estimates. Results Using the weighted data, an average of 131,558,553 patient encounters were included each year for the 11-year study period. Imaging was used at 46% of all visits although this varied significantly by patient race and ethnicity with white patients receiving medical imaging at 49% of visits and non-white patients at 41% of visits (p < 0.001). This effect persisted in the controlled regression model and across all imaging modalities with the exception of ultrasound. Other factors with a significant influence on imaging use included patient age, gender, insurance status, number of co-morbidities, hospital setting (urban vs non-urban) and hospital region. There was no evidence to suggest that the disparate use of imaging by patient race and ethnicity changed over the 11-year study time period. Conclusion The likelihood that a diagnostic imaging exam will be ordered during United States emergency department encounters differs significantly by patient race and ethnicity even when controlling for other patient and hospital characteristics. Further work must be done to understand and mitigate what may represent systematic bias and ensure equitable use of health care resources.

Download Full-text