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:To collect patient race/ethnicity and language (r/e/l) in an ambulatory care setting.The Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF), December 2006-May 2008.Three 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.Studies were planned and executed by PAMF's Quality and Planning division.Collecting 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.Conducting sequential studies can help guide r/e/l collection in a short time frame.
| S-EPMC2754558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Racial and ethnic disparities in access to health care may result from discrimination. Objectives:To 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 Participants:This 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. Exposures:Research 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 Measures:Appointment offer rates, days to appointment, and questions asked during the call. Results:Of 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 Relevance:In 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:This study examined the interaction of race-ethnicity and gender in depression screening, receipt of any mental health care, and receipt of adequate care.Data 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.Among 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.This 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:Importance:Previous research suggests that the prevalence of occupational burnout varies by demographic characteristics, such as sex and age, but the association between physician race/ethnicity and occupational burnout is less well understood. Objective:To investigate possible differences in occupational burnout, depressive symptoms, career satisfaction, and work-life integration by race/ethnicity in a sample of US physicians. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this cross-sectional study, data for this secondary analysis of 4424 physicians were originally collected from a cross-sectional survey of US physicians between October 12, 2017, and March 15, 2018. The dates of analysis were March 8, 2019, to May 21, 2020. Multivariable logistic regression, including statistical adjustment for physician demographic and clinical practice characteristics, was performed to examine the association between physician race/ethnicity and occupational burnout, depressive symptoms, career satisfaction, and work-life integration. Exposures:Physician demographic and clinical practice characteristics included race/ethnicity, sex, age, clinical specialty, hours worked per week, primary practice setting, and relationship status. Main Outcomes and Measures:Physicians with a high score on the emotional exhaustion or depersonalization subscale of the Maslach Burnout Inventory were classified as having burnout. Depressive symptoms were measured using the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders instrument. Physicians who marked "strongly agree" or "agree" in response to the survey items "I would choose to become a physician again" and "My work schedule leaves me enough time for my personal/family life" were considered to be satisfied with their career and work-life integration, respectively. Results:Data were available for 4424 physicians (mean [SD] age, 52.46 [12.03] years; 61.5% [2722 of 4424] male). Most physicians (78.7% [3480 of 4424]) were non-Hispanic White. Non-Hispanic Asian, Hispanic/Latinx, and non-Hispanic Black physicians comprised 12.3% (542 of 4424), 6.3% (278 of 4424), and 2.8% (124 of 4424) of the sample, respectively. Burnout was observed in 44.7% (1540 of 3447) of non-Hispanic White physicians, 41.7% (225 of 540) of non-Hispanic Asian physicians, 38.5% (47 of 122) of non-Hispanic Black physicians, and 37.4% (104 of 278) of Hispanic/Latinx physicians. The adjusted odds of burnout were lower in non-Hispanic Asian physicians (odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.96), Hispanic/Latinx physicians (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.86), and non-Hispanic Black physicians (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79) compared with non-Hispanic White physicians. Non-Hispanic Black physicians were more likely to report satisfaction with work-life integration compared with non-Hispanic White physicians (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.05-2.73). No differences in depressive symptoms or career satisfaction were observed by race/ethnicity. Conclusions and Relevance:Physicians in minority racial/ethnic groups were less likely to report burnout compared with non-Hispanic White physicians. Future research is necessary to confirm these results, investigate factors contributing to increased rates of burnout among non-Hispanic White physicians, and assess factors underlying the observed patterns in measures of physician wellness by race/ethnicity.
| S-EPMC7414389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe clinical utility of race and ethnicity has been debated. It is important to understand if and how race and ethnicity are communicated and collected in clinical settings. We investigated physicians' self-reported methods of collecting a patient's race and ethnicity in the clinical encounter, their comfort with collecting race and ethnicity, and associations with use of race in clinical decision-making.MethodsA national cross-sectional study of 787 clinically active general internists in the United States. Physicians' self-reported comfort with collecting patient race and ethnicity, their collection practices, and use of race in clinical care were assessed. Bivariate and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between comfort, collection practices, and use of race.ResultsMost physicians asked patients to self-report their race or ethnicity (26.5%) on an intake form or collected this information directly from patients (26.2%). Most physicians were comfortable collecting patient race and ethnicity (84.3%). Physicians who were more comfortable collecting patient race and ethnicity (β= 1.65; [95% confidence interval; CI 0.03-3.28]) or who directly collected patients' race and ethnicity (β= 1.24 [95% CI 0.07-2.41]) were more likely to use race in clinical decision-making than physicians who were uncomfortable.ConclusionsThis study documents variation in physician comfort level and practice patterns regarding patient race and ethnicity data collection. As the U.S. population becomes more diverse, future work should examine how physicians speak about race and ethnicity with patients and their use of race and ethnicity data impact patient-physician relationships, clinical decision-making, and patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC5621603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo describe data collection methods and to audit staff data entry of patient self-reported race/ethnicity/ancestry and preferred spoken language (R/E/A/L) information.Data source/study settingLarge mixed payer outpatient health care organization in Northern California, June 2009.Study designSecondary analysis of an audit planned and executed by the Department of Clinical Services.Data collection/extraction methodsWe analyzed concordance between patient written responses and staff data entry.Principal findingsThe data entry accuracy rate across questions was high, ranging from 92 to 97 percent. Inaccuracies were due to human error (62 percent), flaws in system design (2 percent), or some combination of both (35 percent).ConclusionsThis study highlights the high accuracy of patient self-reported R/E/A/L data entry and identifies some areas for improvement in staff training and technical system design to facilitate further progress.
| S-EPMC3447251 | biostudies-literature