CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30Racial and Ethnic Identity ResearchRace, Genetics, and SocietyHealth disparities and outcomes

Uses of theory in racial health disparities research: a scoping review and application of public health critical race praxis

Mannor, Kara M., Malcoe, Lorraine Halinka·2022·Annals of Epidemiology
DOI 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.11.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Given the persistence of racial health disparities, scholars have called for investigations into structural origins of health inequity and deeper engagement with theory. We systematically assessed uses of theory-including theory-informed conceptualizations of race and ethnicity, social structure, and racial hierarchy-in epidemiology and other quantitative population health literature on racial health disparities. We conducted a scoping review of systematically identified original research articles (n=650) that sought to explain racial health disparities; articles were published in 17 high-impact epidemiology, public health, and social science journals. Trained coders abstracted data from each article. We applied Public Health Critical Race Praxis and an iterative data-charting method to identify key themes. Only 63 (9.7%) of 650 racial health disparities articles explicitly used theory. Among studies that engaged theory, one third (n=21/63) clearly conceptualized race and/or ethnicity, and a minority theorized social structure (n=19/63; 30%) and/or racial hierarchy as a structural relation (n=4/63; 6%). There is a pressing need for racial health disparities researchers to unambiguously use theory to conceptualize race and ethnicity in social and historical contexts and explain relational aspects of racial hierarchy. These approaches can better elucidate and inform action on structural determinants of both racial inequity and racial health inequity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.11.007

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gee, 2011, Structural racism and health inequities: old issues, new directions, Du Bois Rev, 8, 115, 10.1017/S1742058X11000130 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mannor, K. M., & Malcoe, L. H.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
Corresponding author
Malcoe, Lorraine Halinka
ORCID
Venue
Annals of Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
66
Pages
56-64
ISSN
1047-2797 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.annepidem.2021.11.007
OpenAlex
W3211658176
Semantic Scholar
355e79e9f0ac4cf86422727c8a40d997ca76fa5b
Cited by
30
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Annals of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
racial disparities in health, theory use in research, Public Health Critical Race Praxis, social structure, racial hierarchy, structural determinants of health, health disparities, critical race theory
MeSH terms
Population Health, Ethnicity, Humans, Minority Groups, Public Health, Research Design, United States, Health Status Disparities, Healthcare Disparities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review