Racial/Ethnic Disparities In COVID-19 Exposure Risk, Testing, And Cases At The Subcounty Level In California.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Reitsma MB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8458028 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:As overdose mortality is spiking during the COVID-19 pandemic, few race/ethnicity-stratified trends are available. This is of particular concern as overdose mortality was increasing most rapidly in Black and Latinx communities prior to the pandemic. We used quarterly, age-standardized overdose mortality rates from California to assess trends by race/ethnicity and drug involved over time. Rates from 2020 Q2-Q4 were compared to expected trends based on ARIMA forecasting models fit using data from 2006 to 2020 Q1. In 2020 Q2-Q4 overdose death rates rose by 49.8% from 2019, exceeding an expected increase of 11.5% (95%CI: 0.5%-22.5%). Rates significantly exceeded forecasted trends for all racial/ethnic groups. Black/African American individuals saw an increase of 52.4% from 2019, compared to 42.6% among their White counterparts. The absolute Black-White overdose mortality gap rose from 0.7 higher per 100,000 for Black individuals in 2018 to 4.8 in 2019, and further increased to 9.9 during the pandemic. Black overdose mortality in California was therefore 34.3% higher than that of White individuals in 2020 Q2-Q4. This reflects growing methamphetamine-, cocaine-, and fentanyl-involved deaths among Black communities. Growing racial disparities in overdose must be understood in the context of the unequal social and economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, during which time Black communities have been subjected to the dual burden of disproportionate COVID-19 deaths and rising overdose mortality. Increased investments are required to ameliorate racial/ethnic disparities in substance use treatment, harm reduction, and the structural drivers of overdose, as part of the COVID-19 response and post-pandemic recovery efforts.
| S-EPMC8521065 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Racial/ethnic disparities in cigarette use and cessation persist. This study compared cigarette consumption and former smoking trends in California (CA) with the rest of the United States (US) by racial/ethnic categories of non-Hispanic White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian/Pacific Islander groups. Data were analyzed from the 1992 to 2011 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. Consumption levels across decades were examined and adjusted logistic regression models were fit to compare across CA and US. Results indicated steady declines in ever smoking prevalence for all groups with much lower magnitudes of change among US Blacks and Whites compared to their CA counterparts. After controlling for age, gender, and education, CA had significantly fewer heavy smokers (OR=0.45, 95% CI:0.38-0.54), more light and intermittent smokers (LITS; OR=1.68, 95%CI: 1.45-1.93), and a greater proportion of former smokers (OR=1.35, 95%CI: 1.24-1.48) than the rest of US. Data were stratified by race/ethnicity and the patterns shown were mostly consistent with CA performing statistically better than their US counterparts with the exception of Black LITS and Asian/Pacific Islander former smokers. California's success in reducing tobacco use disparities may serve as a prime example of tobacco control policy for the country. CA and the US will need to continue to address tobacco use and cessation in the context of the growing diversity of the population.
| S-EPMC5554114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMechanisms underlying racial and ethnic disparities in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) vs open radical prostatectomy (ORP) are unclear. We sought to test two physician-level hypotheses: (1)-Segregated Treatment and (2)-Differential Treatment.MethodsThis observational study used the New York State Cancer Registry linked to discharge records and included patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer during 10/1/2008-12/31/2018. For hypothesis-(1), we examined the association between patient race and ethnicity and treating surgeon RARP use (high-use surgeons, low-use surgeons, and surgeons at non-RARP facilities). For hypothesis-(2), we determined the association between patient race and ethnicity and receipt of RARP when matching on treating surgeon, age, year of procedure, and Gleason group. We explored the role of insurance in both analyses.ResultsThis study included 18,926 patients (8.0% Hispanic, 16.9% non-Hispanic Black, 75.1% non-Hispanic White), with a mean age of 60.4 ± 7.1 years. Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds of being treated by low-RARP-use surgeons (OR[95% CI]: 2.16[1.20-3.88] and 1.76[1.06-2.94], respectively) and by surgeons at non-RARP facilities (OR[95% CI]: 4.19[2.18-8.07] and 4.60[2.58-8.23], respectively). In the matched cohorts, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely to receive RARP than non-Hispanic White patients (OR[95% CI]: 0.78[0.62-0.98] and 0.75[0.57-1.00], respectively). These associations were partially attenuated after accounting for insurance.ConclusionsRacial and ethnic disparities in RARP use are related to patients being treated by different surgeons and treated differently by the same surgeons. Identifying and addressing multilevel barriers to equitable surgical treatment is needed to reduce disparities among prostate cancer patients.
| S-EPMC11340640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe US aging population is rapidly becoming more racially and ethnically diverse. Early diagnosis of dementia is a health care priority.ObjectiveTo examine the associations between race/ethnicity and timeliness of dementia diagnosis and comprehensiveness of diagnostic evaluation.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study used 2013-2015 California Medicare fee-for-service data to examine the associations of race/ethnicity, individual factors, and contextual factors with the timeliness and comprehensiveness of dementia diagnosis. Data from 10 472 unique beneficiaries were analyzed. The sample was selected on the basis of the following criteria: presence of 1 or more claims; no diagnoses of dementia or mild cognitive impairment in 2013 to 2014; continuous enrollment in Medicare Parts A and B; Asian, Black, Hispanic, or White race/ethnicity; and incident diagnoses of dementia or mild cognitive impairment in January through June 2015. Data analyses were conducted from November 1, 2019, through November 10, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresTimeliness of diagnosis, defined as incident diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment vs dementia, and comprehensiveness of diagnostic evaluation, defined as presence of the following services in claims within 6 months before or after the incident diagnosis date: specialist evaluation, laboratory testing, and neuroimaging studies.ResultsThe sample comprised 10 472 unique Medicare beneficiaries with incident diagnoses of dementia or mild cognitive impairment (6504 women [62.1%]; mean [SD] age, 82.9 [8.0] years) and included 993 individuals who identified as Asian (9.5%), 407 as Black (3.9%), 1255 as Hispanic (12.0%), and 7817 as White (74.6%). Compared with White beneficiaries, those who identified as Asian (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.38-0.56), Black (odds ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.94), or Hispanic (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52-0.72) were less likely to receive a timely diagnosis. Asian beneficiaries (incidence rate ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.87) also received fewer diagnostic evaluation elements. These associations remained significant after adjusting for age, sex, comorbidity burden, neighborhood disadvantage, and rurality.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings highlight substantial disparities in the timeliness and comprehensiveness of dementia diagnosis. Public health interventions are needed to achieve equitable care for people living with dementia across all racial/ethnic groups.
| S-EPMC8008426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 testing data in North Carolina during the first three months of the state's COVID-19 pandemic were analyzed to determine if there were disparities among intersecting axes of identity including race, Latinx ethnicity, age, urban-rural residence, and residence in a medically underserved area. Demographic and residential data were used to reconstruct patterns of testing metrics (including tests per capita, positive tests per capita, and test positivity rate which is an indicator of sufficient testing) across race-ethnicity groups and urban-rural populations separately. Across the entire sample, 13.1% (38,750 of 295,642) of tests were positive. Within racial-ethnic groups, 11.5% of all tests were positive among non-Latinx (NL) Whites, 22.0% for NL Blacks, and 66.5% for people of Latinx ethnicity. The test positivity rate was higher among people living in rural areas across all racial-ethnic groups. These results suggest that in the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic, access to COVID-19 testing in North Carolina was not evenly distributed across racial-ethnic groups, especially in Latinx, NL Black and other historically marginalized populations, and further disparities existed within these groups by gender, age, urban-rural status, and residence in a medically underserved area.
| S-EPMC8212571 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9335138 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSocioeconomic differences may confound racial and ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing and COVID-19 outcomes.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted of racial/ethnic differences in SARS-CoV-2 testing and positive tests and COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among adults impaneled at a Northern California regional medical center and enrolled in the county Medicaid managed care plan (N=84,346) as of March 1, 2020. Logistic regressions adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and neighborhood characteristics.ResultsNearly 30% of enrollees were ever tested for SARS-CoV-2, and 4% tested positive. A total of 19.7 per 10,000 were hospitalized for and 9.4 per 10,000 died of COVID-19. Those identified as Asian, Black, or of other/unknown race had lower testing rates, whereas those identified as Latino had higher testing rates than Whites. Enrollees of Asian or other/unknown race had slightly higher odds of a positive test, and Latinos had much higher odds of a positive test (OR=3.77, 95% CI=3.41, 4.17) than Whites. The odds of hospitalization (OR=2.85, 95% CI=1.85, 4.40) and death (OR=4.75, 95% CI=2.23, 10.12) were higher for Latino than for White patients, even after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and neighborhood characteristics.ConclusionsIn a Medicaid managed care population, where socioeconomic differences may be reduced, the odds of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, COVID-19 hospitalization, and COVID-19 death were higher for Latino but not Black patients than for White patients. Racial/ethnic disparities depend on local context. The substantially higher risk facing Latinos should be a key consideration in California's strategies to mitigate disease transmission and harm.
| S-EPMC8282435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPreliminary evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic shows the presence of health disparities, especially in terms of morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence on the association of racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status (SES) with health outcomes and access to healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe retrieved published evidence from late December 2019 through March 1, 2021. The target population was the population of the countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. The exposures were defined as belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups and/or low SES. The primary outcomes of interest include (1) death from COVID-19, (2) COVID-19 incidence/infection, (3) COVID-19 hospitalization, (4) ICU admission, (5) need for mechanical ventilation, (6) confirmed diagnosis, and (7) access to testing. We systematically synthesized the findings from different studies and provided a narrative explanation of the results.ResultsAfter removing the duplicate results and screening for relevant titles and abstracts, 77 studies were selected for full-text review. Finally, 52 studies were included in the review. The majority of the studies were from the United States (37 studies). Despite the significant incongruity among the studies, most of them showed that racial/ethnic minority groups had higher risks of COVID-19 infection and hospitalization, confirmed diagnosis, and death. Additionally, most of the studies cited factors such as low level of education, poverty, poor housing conditions, low household income, speaking in a language other than the national language in a country, and living in overcrowded households as risk factors of COVID-19 incidence/infection, death, and confirmed diagnosis. However, findings in terms of the association of lack of health insurance coverage and unemployment with the outcome measures as well as the association of requiring mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and access to testing for COVID-19 with race/ethnicity were limited and inconsistent.ConclusionIt is evident that racial/ethnic minority groups and those from low SES are more vulnerable to COVID-19; therefore, public health policymakers, practitioners, and clinicians should be aware of these inequalities and strive to narrow the gap by focusing on vulnerable populations. This systematic review also revealed a major incongruity in the definition of the racial/ethnic minority groups and SES among the studies.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020190105.
| S-EPMC8611382 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRace, ethnicity, and rurality-related disparities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine uptake have been documented in the United States (US).ObjectiveWe determined whether these disparities existed among patients at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the largest healthcare system in the US.Design settings participants measurementsUsing VA Corporate Data Warehouse data, we included 5,871,438 patients (9.4% women) with at least one primary care visit in 2019 in a retrospective cohort study. Each patient was assigned a single race/ethnicity, which were mutually exclusive, self-reported categories. Rurality was based on 2019 home address at the zip code level. Our primary outcome was time-to-first COVID-19 vaccination between December 15, 2020-June 15, 2021. Additional covariates included age (in years), sex, geographic region (North Atlantic, Midwest, Southeast, Pacific, Continental), smoking status (current, former, never), Charlson Comorbidity Index (based on ≥1 inpatient or two outpatient ICD codes), service connection (any/none, using standardized VA-cutoffs for disability compensation), and influenza vaccination in 2019-2020 (yes/no).ResultsCompared with unvaccinated patients, those vaccinated (n=3,238,532; 55.2%) were older (mean age in years vaccinated=66.3, (standard deviation=14.4) vs. unvaccinated=57.7, (18.0), p<.0001)). They were more likely to identify as Black (18.2% vs. 16.1%, p<.0001), Hispanic (7.0% vs. 6.6% p<.0001), or Asian American/Pacific Islander (AA/PI) (2.0% vs. 1.7%, P<.0001). In addition, they were more likely to reside in urban settings (68.0% vs. 62.8, p<.0001). Relative to non-Hispanic White urban Veterans, the reference group for race/ethnicity-urban/rural hazard ratios reported, all urban race/ethnicity groups were associated with increased likelihood for vaccination except American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) groups. Urban Black groups were 12% more likely (Hazard Ratio (HR)=1.12 [CI 1.12-1.13]) and rural Black groups were 6% more likely to receive a first vaccination (HR=1.06 [1.05-1.06]) relative to white urban groups. Urban Hispanic, AA/PI and Mixed groups were more likely to receive vaccination while rural members of these groups were less likely (Hispanic: Urban HR=1.17 [1.16-1.18], Rural HR=0.98 [0.97-0.99]; AA/PI: Urban HR=1.22 [1.21-1.23], Rural HR=0.86 [0.84-0.88]). Rural White Veterans were 21% less likely to receive an initial vaccine compared with urban White Veterans (HR=0.79 [0.78-0.79]). AI/AN groups were less likely to receive vaccination regardless of rurality: Urban HR=0.93 [0.91-0.95]; AI/AN-Rural HR=0.76 [0.74-0.78].ConclusionsUrban Black, Hispanic, and AA/PI Veterans were more likely than their urban White counterparts to receive a first vaccination; all rural race/ethnicity groups except Black patients had lower likelihood for vaccination compared with urban White patients. A better understanding of disparities and rural outreach will inform equitable vaccine distribution.
| S-EPMC10038675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As of 18 October 2020, over 39.5 million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 1.1 million associated deaths have been reported worldwide. It is crucial to understand the effect of social determination of health on novel COVID-19 outcomes in order to establish health justice. There is an imperative need, for policy makers at all levels, to consider socioeconomic and racial and ethnic disparities in pandemic planning. Cross-sectional analysis from COVID Boston University's Center for Antiracist Research COVID Racial Data Tracker was performed to evaluate the racial and ethnic distribution of COVID-19 outcomes relative to representation in the United States. Representation quotients (RQs) were calculated to assess for disparity using state-level data from the American Community Survey (ACS). We found that on a national level, Hispanic/Latinx, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders, and Black people had RQs > 1, indicating that these groups are over-represented in COVID-19 incidence. Dramatic racial and ethnic variances in state-level incidence and mortality RQs were also observed. This study investigates pandemic disparities and examines some factors which inform the social determination of health. These findings are key for developing effective public policy and allocating resources to effectively decrease health disparities. Protective standards, stay-at-home orders, and essential worker guidelines must be tailored to address the social determination of health in order to mitigate health injustices, as identified by COVID-19 incidence and mortality RQs.
| S-EPMC7663309 | biostudies-literature