scholarly journals A New Title, a New Focus: Community Health Equity Research and Policy

Author(s):  
Kathryn P. Derose ◽  
Aline Gubrium
2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 1802-1807
Author(s):  
Rebecca G Block ◽  
Jon Puro ◽  
Erika Cottrell ◽  
Mitchell R Lunn ◽  
M J Dunne ◽  
...  

Abstract Health and healthcare disparities continue despite clinical, research, and policy efforts. Large clinical datasets may not contain data relevant to healthcare disparities and leveraging these for research may be crucial to improve health equity. The Health Disparities Collaborative Research Group was commissioned by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to examine the data science needs for quality and complete data and provide recommendations for improving data science around health disparities. The group convened content experts, researchers, clinicians, and patients to produce these recommendations and suggestions for implementation. Our desire was to produce recommendations to improve the usability of healthcare datasets for health equity research. The recommendations are summarized in 3 primary domains: patient voice, accurate variables, and data linkage. The implementation of these recommendations in national datasets has the potential to accelerate health disparities research and promote efforts to reduce health inequities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-61
Author(s):  
Deonni Stolldorf ◽  
Hayley D. Germack ◽  
Jordan Harrison ◽  
Kathryn Riman ◽  
Heather Brom ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-424
Author(s):  
Erica Payton Foh ◽  
Sandra E. Echeverria

 The COVID-19 pandemic is revealing the deeply entrenched structural inequities in health that exist in the United States. We draw parallels between the COVID-19 pan­demic and our cardiovascular health equity research focused on physical activity and diabetes to highlight three common needs: 1) access to timely and disaggregated data; 2) how to integrate community-engaged approaches in telehealth; and 3) policy ini­tiatives that explicitly integrate health equity and social justice principles and action. We suggest that a similar sense of urgency regarding COVID-19 should be applied to slow the burgeoning costs and suffer­ing associated with cardiovascular disease overall and in marginalized communities specifically. We remain hopeful that the current crisis can serve as a guide for align­ing our principles as a just and democratic society with a health agenda that explicitly recognizes that social inequities in health for some impacts all members of society. Ethn Dis. 2020;30(3):421-424; doi:10.18865/ed.30.3.421


2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 395-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Kent ◽  
Charlotte Loppie ◽  
Jeannine Carriere ◽  
Marjorie MacDonald ◽  
Bernie Pauly

Introduction Both health equity research and Indigenous health research are driven by the goal of promoting equitable health outcomes among marginalized and underserved populations. However, the two fields often operate independently, without collaboration. As a result, Indigenous populations are underrepresented in health equity research relative to the disproportionate burden of health inequities they experience. In this methodological article, we present Xpey’ Relational Environments, an analytic framework that maps some of the barriers and facilitators to health equity for Indigenous peoples. Methods Health equity research needs to include a focus on Indigenous populations and Indigenized methodologies, a shift that could fill gaps in knowledge with the potential to contribute to ‘closing the gap’ in Indigenous health. With this in mind, the Equity Lens in Public Health (ELPH) research program adopted the Xpey’ Relational Environments framework to add a focus on Indigenous populations to our research on the prioritization and implementation of health equity. The analytic framework introduced an Indigenized health equity lens to our methodology, which facilitated the identification of social, structural and systemic determinants of Indigenous health. To test the framework, we conducted a pilot case study of one of British Columbia’s regional health authorities, which included a review of core policies and plans as well as interviews and focus groups with frontline staff, managers and senior executives. Conclusion ELPH’s application of Xpey’ Relational Environments serves as an example of the analytic framework’s utility for exploring and conceptualizing Indigenous health equity in BC’s public health system. Future applications of the framework should be embedded in Indigenous research methodologies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-60
Author(s):  
Sage J. Kim ◽  
Jesus Ramirez-Valles ◽  
Karriem Watson ◽  
Paula Allen-Mears ◽  
Alicia Matthews ◽  
...  

AbstractIntroduction:The purpose of this article is to describe the process of developing and implementing a transdisciplinary community-based research center, the Center for Health Equity Research (CHER) Chicago, to offer a model for designing and implementing research centers that aim to address structural causes of health inequality.Methods:Scholars from diverse backgrounds and disciplines formed a multidisciplinary team for the Center and adopted the structural violence framework as the organizing conceptual model. All Center activities were based on community partnership. The Center activities were organized within three cores: administrative, investigator development, and community engagement and dissemination cores. The key activities during the first year were to develop a pilot grant program for early-stage investigators (ESIs) and to establish community partnership mechanisms.Results:CHER provided more than 60 consultations for ESIs, which resulted in 31 pilot applications over the three application cycles. Over 200 academic and community partners attended the community symposium and discussed community priority. Some challenges encountered were to improve communication among investigators, to clarify roles and responsibilities of the three cores, and to build consensus on the definition and operationalization of the concept of structural violence.Conclusion:There is an increasing need for local hubs to facilitate transdisciplinary collaboration and community engagement to effectively address health inequity. Building consensus around a shared vision among partners is a difficult and yet important step toward achieving equity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1317-1327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derek M. Griffith

How might the science of men’s health progress if research on marginalized or subordinated men is moved from the margins of the literature to the center? This commentary seeks to answer this question, suggesting that if more attention is paid to men of color and other marginalized men, the field will be greatly enriched in its ability to understand determinants of men’s health. Reimagining men’s health by moving men’s health disparities to a primary focus of the field may yield critical new insights that would be essential to moving men’s health to the center of health equity research. Focusing on the dual goals of improving the health of marginalized men and examining the determinants of disparities among men and between men and women will yield insights into mechanisms, pathways, and strategies to improve men’s health and address health disparities. Current definitions of health disparities limit the nation’s ability to dedicate resources to populations that need attention—men of color and other marginalized men—that do not fit these definitions. Moving marginalized men to the center of research in men’s health will foster new ways of understanding determinants of men’s health that cannot be identified without focusing on populations of men whose health is as influenced by race, ethnicity, and other structures of marginalization as it is by gender and masculinities. Using Black men as a case example, the article illustrates how studying marginalized men can refine the study of men’s health and health equity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document