Article

Addressing racial and ethnic disparities in health care: using federal data to support local programs to eliminate disparities.

Brigham and Women's Hospital, Division of General Medicine, 1620 Tremont Street, Boston, MA 02120, USA.
Health Services Research (Impact Factor: 2.49). 09/2006; 41(4 Pt 1):1451-68. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00549.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To reduce racial and ethnic disparities in health care, managers, policy makers, and researchers need valid and reliable data on the race and ethnicity of individuals and populations. The federal government is one of the most important sources of such data. In this paper we review the strengths and weaknesses of federal data that pertain to racial and ethnic disparities in health care. We describe recent developments that are likely to influence how these data can be used in the future and discuss how local programs could make use of these data.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Eric Carl Schneider, Jul 23, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
46 Views
  • Source
    • "Nationally representative datasets are commonly used to measure health care disparities; a number of these provide sufficient data to assess disparities at the national level (Sequist and Schneider 2006). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To review methods of measuring racial/ethnic health care disparities. Identification and tracking of racial/ethnic disparities in health care will be advanced by application of a consistent definition and reliable empirical methods. We have proposed a definition of racial/ethnic health care disparities based in the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Unequal Treatment report, which defines disparities as all differences except those due to clinical need and preferences. After briefly summarizing the strengths and critiques of this definition, we review methods that have been used to implement it. We discuss practical issues that arise during implementation and expand these methods to identify sources of disparities. We also situate the focus on methods to measure racial/ethnic health care disparities (an endeavor predominant in the United States) within a larger international literature in health outcomes and health care inequality. EMPIRICAL APPLICATION: We compare different methods of implementing the IOM definition on measurement of disparities in any use of mental health care and mental health care expenditures using the 2004-2008 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Disparities analysts should be aware of multiple methods available to measure disparities and their differing assumptions. We prefer a method concordant with the IOM definition.
    Health Services Research 02/2012; 47(3 Pt 2):1232-54. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2012.01387.x · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Major gaps also exist in available measures of socioeconomic status, language, and ethnicity, which some argue is even more important than race (Laws and Heckscher 2002). Small sample sizes numbers also constrain use of reported data (see, for example, Sequist and Schneider 2006; Andresen et al. 2004). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Assessing health status is a core function of public health on the state level. This report summarizes the data available in each state for health assessment, a necessary step in achieving public health goals. Using the leading indicators from Healthy People 2010, the authors found that while data generally are available across all states, gaps do exist. Across states, data sometimes are not available for a few specific health objectives and for certain age groups.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in health care and health outcomes are well documented. Disparities research is evolving from documenting these disparities, to understanding their causes and mechanisms, and finally to conducting interventional research to reduce or eliminate disparities. Unfortunately, few studies to date have demonstrated substantial reductions in health outcomes disparities. Traditional experimental models of research that test a single intervention held constant throughout the study period may not have the power to impact complex clusters of comorbid health disparities in patients who receive care in underresourced primary care safety net practice settings. New models of research will be required to test dynamic, multidimensional interventions that triangulate on patients, providers, and communities and are continuously improved with every radar-sweep of feedback from rapid-cycle measurement of population health outcomes on a community-wide basis. In this article, we review 12 promising strategies that could substantially increase the impact of research on eliminating health disparities in America.
    The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 03/2007; 20(2):105-14. DOI:10.3122/jabfm.2007.02.060131 · 1.85 Impact Factor