CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 227Racial and Ethnic Identity ResearchHealth disparities and outcomesPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Racial discrimination and health: A systematic review of scales with a focus on their psychometric properties

Bastos, Joao Luiz, Celeste, Roger Keller, Faerstein, Eduardo, Barros, Aluisio J.D.·2010·Social Science & Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.12.020
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The literature addressing the use of the race variable to study causes of racial inequities in health is characterized by a dense discussion on the pitfalls in interpreting statistical associations as causal relationships. In contrast, fewer studies have addressed the use of racial discrimination scales to estimate discrimination effects on health, and none of them provided a thorough assessment of the scales' psychometric properties. Our aim was to systematically review self-reported racial discrimination scales to describe their development processes and to provide a synthesis of their psychometric properties. A computer-based search in PubMed, LILACS, PsycInfo, Scielo, Scopus and Web of Science was conducted without any type of restriction, using search queries containing free and controlled vocabulary. After initially identifying 3060 references, 24 scales were included in the review. Despite the fact that discrimination stands as topic of international relevance, 23 (96%) scales were developed within the United States. Most studies (67%, N = 16) were published in the last 12 years, documenting initial attempts at scale development, with a dearth of investigations on scale refinements or cross-cultural adaptations. Psychometric properties were acceptable; sixteen of all scales presented reliability scores above 0.7, 19 out of 20 instruments confirmed at least 75% of all previously stated hypotheses regarding the constructs under consideration, and conceptual dimensional structure was supported by means of any type of factor analysis in 17 of 21 scales. However, independent researchers, apart from the original scale developers, have rarely examined such scales. The use of racial terminology and how it may influence self-reported experiences of discrimination has not yet been thoroughly examined. The need to consider other types of unfair treatment as concurrently important health-damaging exposures, and the idea of a universal instrument which would permit cross-cultural adaptations, should be discussed among researchers in this emerging field of inquiry.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.12.020

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 73 references

2 of the 73 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bastos, J. L., Celeste, R. K., Faerstein, E., & Barros, A. J. D.
Affiliations
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (BR)
ORCID
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-04
Volume
70
Issue
7
Pages
1091-1099
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.12.020
OpenAlex
W2016416277
Cited by
227
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 16
FWCI
6.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
racial discrimination, psychometric properties, scale development, self-reported discrimination, reliability statistics, factor structure, cross-cultural adaptation, racial terminology, unfair treatment
MeSH terms
Humans, Prejudice, Psychometrics, Health Status 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