Testing for statistical discrimination by race/ethnicity in panel data for depression treatment in primary care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To test for discrimination by race/ethnicity arising from clinical uncertainty in treatment for depression, also known as "statistical discrimination."Data sources
We used survey data from 1,321 African-American, Hispanic, and white adults identified with depression in primary care. Surveys were administered every six months for two years in the Quality Improvement for Depression (QID) studies.Study design
To examine whether and how change in depression severity affects change in treatment intensity by race/ethnicity, we used multivariate cross-sectional and change models that difference out unobserved time-invariant patient characteristics potentially correlated with race/ethnicity.Data collection/extraction methods
Treatment intensity was operationalized as expenditures on drugs, primary care, and specialty services, weighted by national prices from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Patient race/ethnicity was collected at baseline by self-report.Principal findings
Change in depression severity is less associated with change in treatment intensity in minority patients than in whites, consistent with the hypothesis of statistical discrimination. The differential effect by racial/ethnic group was accounted for by use of mental health specialists.Conclusions
Enhanced physician-patient communication and use of standardized depression instruments may reduce statistical discrimination arising from clinical uncertainty and be useful in reducing racial/ethnic inequities in depression treatment.
SUBMITTER: McGuire TG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2442383 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Testing for statistical discrimination by race/ethnicity in panel data for depression treatment in primary care.
McGuire Thomas G TG Ayanian John Z JZ Ford Daniel E DE Henke Rachel E M RE Rost Kathryn M KM Zaslavsky Alan M AM
Health services research 20080401 2
<h4>Objective</h4>To test for discrimination by race/ethnicity arising from clinical uncertainty in treatment for depression, also known as "statistical discrimination."<h4>Data sources</h4>We used survey data from 1,321 African-American, Hispanic, and white adults identified with depression in primary care. Surveys were administered every six months for two years in the Quality Improvement for Depression (QID) studies.<h4>Study design</h4>To examine whether and how change in depression severity ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo collect patient race/ethnicity and language (r/e/l) in an ambulatory care setting.Data sources/study settingThe Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF), December 2006-May 2008.Study designThree pilot studies: (1) Comparing mail versus telephone versus clinic visit questionnaire distribution; (2) comparing the front desk method (FDM) versus exam room method (ERM) in the clinic visit; and (3) determining resource allocation necessary for data entry.Data collection/extraction methodsStudies were planned and executed by PAMF's Quality and Planning division.Principal findingsCollecting r/e/l data during clinic visits elicited the highest response rate. The FDM yielded higher response rate than the ERM. One full-time equivalent is initially necessary for data entry.ConclusionsConducting sequential studies can help guide r/e/l collection in a short time frame.
| S-EPMC2754558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRacial and ethnic disparities in access to health care may result from discrimination.ObjectivesTo identify differences in the rates at which patients belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups are offered primary care appointments and the number of days they wait for their primary care appointment and to understand the mechanisms by which discrimination occurs.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used 7 simulated black, Hispanic, and white patient callers to request appointments from 804 randomized primary care offices in 2 urban centers in Texas from November 2017 to February 2018. Data analysis was conducted between February and December 2018.ExposuresResearch assistants called randomly assigned offices to schedule an appointment, supplying the same basic information. Race and ethnicity were signaled through callers' names and voices.Main outcomes and measuresAppointment offer rates, days to appointment, and questions asked during the call.ResultsOf the 7 callers (age range, 18-29 years), 2 (28.6%) self-identified as non-Hispanic black, 3 (42.9%) self-identified as non-Hispanic white, and 2 (28.6%) self-identified as Hispanic. Of the 804 calls they made, 299 (37.2%) were from simulated white callers, 215 (26.7%) were from simulated black callers, and 290 (36.1%) were from simulated Hispanic callers. Overall, 582 callers (72.4%) were offered appointments. In unadjusted models, black and Hispanic callers were more likely to be offered an appointment than white callers (black callers, 32.2 [95% CI, 25.1-39.3] percentage points more likely; P < .001; Hispanic callers, 21.1 [95% CI, 13.7-28.5] percentage points more likely; P < .001). However, after adjusting for whether insurance status was revealed, this statistical significance was lost. In adjusted models, black callers were 44.0 (95% CI, 36.2-51.8) percentage points more likely to be asked about their insurance status than white callers (P < .001), and Hispanic callers were 25.3 (95% CI, 17.1-33.5) percentage points more likely to be asked about their insurance status (P < .001) than white callers. Black and Hispanic callers received appointments further in the future than white callers (black callers: marginal effect estimate, 3.650; 95% CI, 0.579 to 6.721; P = .08; Hispanic callers: marginal effect estimate, 2.644; 95% CI, -0.496 to 5.784; P = .02).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, black and Hispanic patients were more likely to be offered an appointment, but they were asked more frequently about their insurance status than white callers. Black and Hispanic callers experienced longer wait times than white patients, indicating a barrier to timely access to primary care.
| S-EPMC6991290 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceKnowledge gaps persist regarding racial and ethnic variation in late-life depression, including differences in specific depressive symptoms and disparities in care.ObjectiveTo examine racial/ethnic differences in depression severity, symptom burden, and care.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study included 25 503 of 25 871 community-dwelling older adults who participated in the Vitamin D and Omega-3 Trial (VITAL), a randomized trial of cancer and cardiovascular disease prevention conducted from November 2011 to December 2017. Data analysis was conducted from June to September 2018.ExposureRacial/ethnic group (ie, non-Hispanic white; black; Hispanic; Asian; and other, multiple, or unspecified race).Main outcomes and measuresDepressive symptoms, assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8); participant-reported diagnosis, medication, and/or counseling for depression. Differences across racial/ethnic groups were evaluated using multivariable zero-inflated negative binomial regression to compare PHQ-8 scores and multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds of item-level symptom burden and odds of depression treatment among those with diagnosed depression.ResultsThere were 25 503 VITAL participants with adequate depression data (mean [SD] age, 67.1 [7.1] years) including 12 888 [50.5%] women, 17 828 [69.9%] non-Hispanic white participants, 5004 [19.6%] black participants, 1001 [3.9%] Hispanic participants, 377 [1.5%] Asian participants, and 1293 participants [5.1%] who were categorized in the other, multiple, or unspecified race group. After adjustment for sociodemographic, lifestyle, and health confounders, black participants had a 10% higher severity level of PHQ-8 scores compared with non-Hispanic white participants (rate ratio [RR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17; P < .001); Hispanic participants had a 23% higher severity level of PHQ-8 scores compared with non-Hispanic white participants (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.10-1.38; P < .001); and participants in the other, multiple, or unspecified group had a 14% higher severity level of PHQ-8 scores compared with non-Hispanic white participants (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.25; P = .007). Compared with non-Hispanic white participants, participants belonging to minority groups had 1.5-fold to 2-fold significantly higher fully adjusted odds of anhedonia (among black participants: odds ratio [OR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.47-2.11; among Hispanic participants: OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.43-2.69), sadness (among black participants: OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.07-1.60; among Hispanic participants: OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.51-2.88), and psychomotor symptoms (among black participants: OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.31-2.39; among Hispanic participants: OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.28-3.50); multivariable-adjusted odds of sleep problems and guilt appeared higher among Hispanic vs non-Hispanic white participants (sleep: OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.52; guilt: 1.84; 95% CI, 1.31-2.59). Among those with clinically significant depressive symptoms (ie, PHQ-8 score ≥10) and/or those with diagnosed depression, black participants were 61% less likely to report any treatment (ie, medications and/or counseling) than non-Hispanic white participants after adjusting for confounders (adjusted OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.56).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, significant racial and ethnic differences in late-life depression severity, item-level symptom burden, and depression care were observed after adjustment for numerous confounders. These findings suggest a need for further examination of novel patient-level and clinician-level factors underlying these associations.
| S-EPMC7325738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceOveruse of diagnostic testing is pervasive, but the extent to which it varies by race and ethnicity in the acute care setting is poorly understood.ObjectiveTo use a previously validated diagnostic intensity index to evaluate differences in diagnostic testing rates by race and ethnicity in the acute care setting, which may serve as a surrogate for diagnostic test overuse.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a cross-sectional study of emergency department (ED) discharges, hospital observation stays, and hospital admissions using administrative claims among EDs and acute care hospitals in Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, and New Jersey, from 2016 through 2018. The diagnostic intensity index pairs nonspecific principal discharge diagnoses (nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, chest pain, and syncope) with related diagnostic tests to estimate rates of nondiagnostic testing. Adults with an acute care encounter with a principal discharge diagnosis of interest were included. Data were analyzed from January to February 2024.ExposureRace and ethnicity (Asian, Black, Hispanic, White, other [including American Indian, multiracial, and multiethnic], and missing).Main outcomes and measuresReceipt of a diagnostic test. Generalized linear models with a hospital-specific indicator variable were estimated to calculate the adjusted odds ratio of receiving a test related to the principal discharge diagnosis by race and ethnicity, controlling for primary payer and zip code income quartile.ResultsOf 3 683 055 encounters (1 055 575 encounters [28.7%] for Black, 300 333 encounters [8.2%] for Hispanic, and 2 140 335 encounters [58.1%] for White patients; mean [SD] age of patients with encounters, 47.3 [18.8] years; 2 233 024 encounters among females [60.6%]), most (2 969 974 encounters [80.6%]) were ED discharges. Black compared with White patients discharged from the ED with a diagnosis of interest had an adjusted odds ratio of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.72-0.75) of having related diagnostic testing. No other racial or ethnic disparities of a similar magnitude were observed in any acute care settings.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, White patients discharged from the ED with a nonspecific diagnosis of interest were significantly more likely than Black patients to receive related diagnostic testing. The extent to which this represents diagnostic test overuse in White patients vs undertesting and missed diagnoses in Black patients deserves further study.
| S-EPMC11350469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceAccess to COVID-19 testing is critical to reducing transmission and supporting early treatment decisions; when made accessible, the timeliness of testing may also be an important metric in mitigating community spread of the infection. While disparities in transmission and outcomes of COVID-19 have been well documented, the extent of timeliness of testing and the association with demographic factors is unclear.ObjectivesTo evaluate demographic factors associated with delayed COVID-19 testing among health care personnel (HCP) during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used data from the Preventing Emerging Infections Through Vaccine Effectiveness Testing study, a multicenter, test-negative, case-control vaccine effectiveness study that enrolled HCP who had COVID-19 symptoms and testing between December 2020 and April 2022. Data analysis was conducted from March 2022 to Junne 2023.ExposureDisplaying COVID-19-like symptoms and polymerase chain reaction testing occurring from the first day symptoms occurred up to 14 days after symptoms occurred.Main outcomes and measuresVariables of interest included patient demographics (sex, age, and clinical comorbidities) and COVID-19 characteristics (vaccination status and COVID-19 wave). The primary outcome was time from symptom onset to COVID-19 testing, which was defined as early testing (≤2 days) or delayed testing (≥3 days). Associations of demographic characteristics with delayed testing were measured while adjusting for clinical comorbidities, COVID-19 characteristics, and test site using multivariable modeling to estimate relative risks and 95% CIs.ResultsA total of 5551 HCP (4859 female [82.9%]; 1954 aged 25-34 years [35.2%]; 4233 non-Hispanic White [76.3%], 370 non-Hispanic Black [6.7%], and 324 non-Hispanic Asian [5.8%]) were included in the final analysis. Overall, 2060 participants (37.1%) reported delayed testing and 3491 (62.9%) reported early testing. Compared with non-Hispanic White HCP, delayed testing was higher among non-Hispanic Black HCP (adjusted risk ratio, 1.18; 95%CI, 1.10-1.27) and for non-Hispanic HCP of other races (adjusted risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.03-1.33). Sex and age were not associated with delayed testing. Compared with clinical HCP with graduate degrees, all other professional and educational groups had significantly delayed testing.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of HCP, compared with non-Hispanic White HCP and clinical HCP with graduate degrees, non-Hispanic Black HCP, non-Hispanic HCP of other races, and HCP all other professional and education backgrounds were more likely to have delayed COVID-19 testing. These findings suggest that time to testing may serve as a valuable metric in evaluating sociodemographic disparities in the response to COVID-19 and future health mitigation strategies.
| S-EPMC11007575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study examined the interaction of race-ethnicity and gender in depression screening, receipt of any mental health care, and receipt of adequate care.MethodsData from electronic health records (2010-2012) of adult primary care patients from a New England urban health care system were used (N=65,079). Multivariate logit regression models were estimated to assess associations between race-ethnicity, gender, and other covariates and depression screening, any depression care among those with a positive screen, and adequate depression care. To measure disparities in utilization, we controlled for need variables but not for non-need variables, including insurance, marital status, and socioeconomic status.ResultsAmong males and females, blacks and Asians were less likely and Latinos were more likely to be screened for depression compared with whites. Among those with moderate or severe depression, black males and females, Latino males, and Asian males and females were less likely than whites to receive any mental health care. The disparity in screening between blacks and whites was greater among females compared with males. The disparity between Latinos and whites in receipt of any mental health care and of adequate care was greater among males than females.ConclusionsThis approach underscored the importance of identifying disparities at each step of depression care by both race-ethnicity and gender. Targeting certain groups in specific stages of care, for example, screening of black females or providing any mental health care and adequate care for Latino males, would be more effective than a blanket approach to disparities reduction.
| S-EPMC4408551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveWe aimed to address deficiencies in structured electronic health record (EHR) data for race and ethnicity by identifying black and Hispanic patients from unstructured clinical notes and assessing differences between patients with or without structured race/ethnicity data.Materials and methodsUsing EHR notes for 16 665 patients with encounters at a primary care practice, we developed rule-based natural language processing (NLP) algorithms to classify patients as black/Hispanic. We evaluated performance of the method against an annotated gold standard, compared race and ethnicity between NLP-derived and structured EHR data, and compared characteristics of patients identified as black or Hispanic using only NLP vs patients identified as such only in structured EHR data.ResultsFor the sample of 16 665 patients, NLP identified 948 additional patients as black, a 26%increase, and 665 additional patients as Hispanic, a 20% increase. Compared with the patients identified as black or Hispanic in structured EHR data, patients identified as black or Hispanic via NLP only were older, more likely to be male, less likely to have commercial insurance, and more likely to have higher comorbidity.DiscussionStructured EHR data for race and ethnicity are subject to data quality issues. Supplementing structured EHR race data with NLP-derived race and ethnicity may allow researchers to better assess the demographic makeup of populations and draw more accurate conclusions about intergroup differences in health outcomes.ConclusionsBlack or Hispanic patients who are not documented as such in structured EHR race/ethnicity fields differ significantly from those who are. Relatively simple NLP can help address this limitation.
| S-EPMC6696506 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledPOLICY POINTS: Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care (specifically, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes) have received little scholarly attention. Our systematic review of the literature (59 studies) found that the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, but when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. The absence of established subject terms in PubMed for the overuse of care or inappropriate care impedes the ability of researchers or policymakers to synthesize prior scientific or policy efforts.ContextThe literature on disparities in health care has examined the contrast between white patients receiving needed care, compared with racial/ethnic minority patients not receiving needed care. Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care, that is, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes, have received less attention. We systematically reviewed the literature regarding race/ethnicity and the overuse of care.MethodsWe searched the Medline database for US studies that included at least 2 racial/ethnic groups and that examined the association between race/ethnicity and the overuse of procedures, diagnostic (care) or therapeutic care. In a recent review, we identified studies of overuse by race/ethnicity, and we also examined reference lists of retrieved articles. We then abstracted and evaluated this information, including the population studied, data source, sample size and assembly, type of care, guideline or appropriateness standard, controls for clinical confounding and financing of care, and findings.FindingsWe identified 59 unique studies, of which 11 had a low risk of methodological bias. Studies with multiple outcomes were counted more than once; collectively they assessed 74 different outcomes. Thirty-two studies, 6 with low risks of bias (LRoB), provided evidence that whites received more inappropriate or nonrecommended care than racial/ethnic minorities did. Nine studies (2 LRoB) found evidence of more overuse of care by minorities than by whites. Thirty-three studies (6 LRoB) found no relationship between race/ethnicity and overuse.ConclusionsAlthough the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. Clinicians and researchers should try to understand how and why race/ethnicity might be associated with overuse and to intervene to reduce it.
| S-EPMC4364433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about the distribution of life-saving trauma resources by racial/ethnic composition in US cities, and if racial/ethnic minority populations disproportionately live in US urban trauma deserts.ObjectiveTo examine racial/ethnic differences in geographic access to trauma care in the 3 largest US cities, considering the role of residential segregation and neighborhood poverty.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional, multiple-methods study evaluated census tract data from the 2015 American Community Survey in Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles (LA), California; and New York City (NYC), New York (N = 3932). These data were paired to geographic coordinates of all adult level I and II trauma centers within an 8.0-km buffer of each city. Between February and September 2018, small-area analyses were conducted to assess trauma desert status as a function of neighborhood racial/ethnic composition, and geospatial analyses were conducted to examine statistically significant trauma desert hot spots.Main outcomes and measuresIn small-area analyses, a trauma desert was defined as travel distance greater than 8.0 km to the nearest adult level I or level II trauma center. In geospatial analyses, relative trauma deserts were identified using travel distance as a continuous measure. Census tracts were classified into (1) racial/ethnic composition categories, based on patterns of residential segregation, including white majority, black majority, Hispanic/Latino majority, and other or integrated; and (2) poverty categories, including nonpoor and poor.ResultsChicago, LA, and NYC contained 798, 1006, and 2128 census tracts, respectively. A large proportion comprised a black majority population in Chicago (35.1%) and NYC (21.4%), compared with LA (2.7%). In primary analyses, black majority census tracts were more likely than white majority census tracts to be located in a trauma desert in Chicago (odds ratio [OR], 8.48; 95% CI, 5.71-12.59) and LA (OR, 5.11; 95% CI, 1.50-17.39). In NYC, racial/ethnic disparities were not significant in unadjusted models, but were significant in models adjusting for poverty and race-poverty interaction effects (adjusted OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.27-2.74). In comparison, Hispanic/Latino majority census tracts were less likely to be located in a trauma desert in NYC (OR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.11) and LA (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.22-0.40), but slightly more likely in Chicago (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.56-3.64).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, black majority census tracts were the only racial/ethnic group that appeared to be associated with disparities in geographic access to trauma centers.
| S-EPMC6484639 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We provide the largest compiled publicly available dictionaries of first, middle, and surnames for the purpose of imputing race and ethnicity using, for example, Bayesian Improved Surname Geocoding (BISG). The dictionaries are based on the voter files of six U.S. Southern States that collect self-reported racial data upon voter registration. Our data cover the racial make-up of a larger set of names than any comparable dataset, containing 136 thousand first names, 125 thousand middle names, and 338 thousand surnames. Individuals are categorized into five mutually exclusive racial and ethnic groups - White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Other - and racial/ethnic probabilities by name are provided for every name in each dictionary. We provide both probabilities of the form ℙ(race|name) and ℙ(name|race), and conditions under which they can be assumed to be representative of a given target population. These conditional probabilities can then be deployed for imputation in a data analytic task for which self-reported racial and ethnic data is not available.
| S-EPMC10199086 | biostudies-literature