CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 194Race, Genetics, and SocietyDiversity and Career in MedicineInnovations in Medical Education

Race Matters? Examining and Rethinking Race Portrayal in Preclinical Medical Education

Tsai, Jennifer, Ucik, Laura, Baldwin, Nell, Hasslinger, Christopher, George, Paul·2016·Academic Medicine
DOI 10.1097/acm.0000000000001232
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Critical examination of “health disparities” is gaining consideration in medical schools across the United States, often as elective curricula that supplement required education. However, there is disconnect between discussions of race and disparities in these curricula and in core science courses. Specifically, required preclinical science lecturers often operationalize race as a biological concept, framing racialized disparities as inherent in bodies. A three- and five-month sampling of lecture slides at the authors’ medical school demonstrated that race was almost always presented as a biological risk factor. This presentation of race as an essential component of epidemiology, risk, diagnosis, and treatment without social context is problematic, as a broad body of literature supports that race is not a robust biological category. The authors opine that current preclinical medical curricula inaccurately employ race as a definitive medical category without context, which may perpetuate misunderstanding of race as a bioscientific datum, increase bias among student–doctors, and ultimately contribute to worse patient outcomes. At the authors’ institution, students approached the medical school administration with a letter addressing the current use of race, urging reform. The administration was receptive to proposals for further analysis of race in medical education and created a taskforce to examine curricular reform. Curricular changes were made as part of the construction of a longitudinal race-in-medicine curriculum. The authors seek to use their initiatives and this article to spark critical discussion on how to use teaching of race to work against racial inequality in health care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000001232

Cites

39 of 39 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Tsai, J., Ucik, L., Baldwin, N., Hasslinger, C., & George, P.
Affiliations
Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Tsai, Jennifer
ORCID
Venue
Academic Medicine
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2016-07
Volume
91
Issue
7
Pages
916-920
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/acm.0000000000001232
OpenAlex
W2363892374
Cited by
194
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
race and medicine, preclinical education, health disparities, biological race, social construction of race, lecture slides, medical curriculum reform, racial inequality in health care
MeSH terms
Curriculum, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Humans, United States, Health Status Disparities, Healthcare Disparities, Racism

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