Article Text

Download PDFPDF
127 What does (and should) antiracism work in injury and violence prevention look (or not look) like?
  1. Shabbar Ranapurwala1,2,
  2. Kate Fitch1,
  3. Julia Campbell3,
  4. Bernadette Hohl4,
  5. Regan Murray5,
  6. Linda Degutis6,
  7. Monica Swilley-Martinez2,7,
  8. Theresa Cruz8
  1. 1Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC, Chapel Hill, USA
  2. 2Injury Prevention Research Center, UNC, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
  3. 3Agnes Scott College, Atlanta, USA
  4. 4Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Rutgers University, School of Public Health, Piscataway, USA
  5. 5Department of Health, Human Performance and Recreation, College of Education and Health Professions, Univ of Arkansas, Fayetteville, USA
  6. 6Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, New Haven, USA
  7. 7Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, UNC, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
  8. 8Prevention Research Center, Department of Pediatrics, Univ of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Albuquerque, USA

Abstract

Statement of Purpose The SAVIR document Conference Presenter Guidelines to Address Health Inequity and Racism, outlines guidance for using the race variable in research studies. Specifically, how not examining effect measure modification (EMM) could lead to a ‘cover-up of underlying structural racism.’ We examined how the prior injury and violence prevention (IVP) literature reflects this guidance.

Methods/Approach We reviewed all manuscripts, excluding postscripts, electronic pages, editorials, policy forums, and SAVIR opinion pieces, that were published in the journal Injury Prevention from 2018–2020. We analyzed the manuscripts for inclusion of variables including race, ethnicity, caste, aboriginal status, and nationality (referred to hereafter as race). Where race data were available, we determined if and how the data were used. Similar analysis of research published in the journal Injury Epidemiology is underway.

Results From 2018–2020, 283 research articles were published in Injury Prevention. Of those, 80 (28.3%) used datasets where race was available, and 55 (19.4%) used race in the published research. The 55 manuscripts included, 6 protocols, one systematic review, one instrument development study, and 47 studies that used race as either a descriptor (n=44; 93.6%), confounder (n=14; 29.8%), EMM (n=14; 29.8%), or combination of those. Nine studies (19.1%) used race as a confounder but did not examine EMM, 15 (31.9%) discussed racial disparities, and only five (10.6%) discussed the role of racism or bias.

Conclusions One in five research studies inappropriately used race as a confounder, one in three discuss racial disparities, and one in 10 discuss the role of systematic racism or bias in their studies.

Significance Overall, the results show a large, missed opportunity for examining and preventing systemic racism in IVP. This work, in combination with the SAVIR presenter guidelines, will lead to recommendations for improving the science of IVP and eliminating racial inequities.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.