BACKGROUND: Racial differences in healthcare are well known, although some have challenged previous research where risk-adjustment assumed covariates affect whites and blacks equally. If incorrect, this assumption may misestimate disparities. We sought to determine whether clinical factors affect treatment decisions for blacks and whites equally. METHODS: We used data from the Cardiovascular Cooperative Project for 130,709 white and 8286 black patients admitted with an acute myocardial infarction. We examined the rates of receipt of 6 treatments using conventional common-effects models, where covariates affect whites and blacks equally, and race-specific models, where the effect of each covariate can vary by race. RESULTS: The common-effects models showed that blacks were less likely to receive 5 of the 6 treatments (odds ratios 0.64-1.10). The race-specific models displayed nearly identical treatment disparities (odds ratios 0.65-1.07). We found no interaction effect, which systematically suggested the presence of race-specific effects. CONCLUSIONS: Race-specific models yield nearly identical estimates of racial disparities to those obtained from conventional models. This suggests that clinical variables, such as hypertension or diabetes, seem to affect treatment decisions equally for whites and blacks. Previously described racial disparities in care are unlikely to be an artifact of misspecified models.
BACKGROUND: Racial differences in healthcare are well known, although some have challenged previous research where risk-adjustment assumed covariates affect whites and blacks equally. If incorrect, this assumption may misestimate disparities. We sought to determine whether clinical factors affect treatment decisions for blacks and whites equally. METHODS: We used data from the Cardiovascular Cooperative Project for 130,709 white and 8286 black patients admitted with an acute myocardial infarction. We examined the rates of receipt of 6 treatments using conventional common-effects models, where covariates affect whites and blacks equally, and race-specific models, where the effect of each covariate can vary by race. RESULTS: The common-effects models showed that blacks were less likely to receive 5 of the 6 treatments (odds ratios 0.64-1.10). The race-specific models displayed nearly identical treatment disparities (odds ratios 0.65-1.07). We found no interaction effect, which systematically suggested the presence of race-specific effects. CONCLUSIONS: Race-specific models yield nearly identical estimates of racial disparities to those obtained from conventional models. This suggests that clinical variables, such as hypertension or diabetes, seem to affect treatment decisions equally for whites and blacks. Previously described racial disparities in care are unlikely to be an artifact of misspecified models.
Authors: S S Rathore; A K Berger; K P Weinfurt; M Feinleib; W J Oetgen; B J Gersh; K A Schulman Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-08-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Dawn M Bravata; Carolyn K Wells; Barbara Gulanski; Walter N Kernan; Lawrence M Brass; Judith Long; John Concato Journal: Stroke Date: 2005-06-16 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: T A Marciniak; E F Ellerbeck; M J Radford; T F Kresowik; J A Gold; H M Krumholz; C I Kiefe; R M Allman; R A Vogel; S F Jencks Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-05-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Arleen F Brown; Edward W Gregg; Mark R Stevens; Andrew J Karter; Morris Weinberger; Monika M Safford; Tiffany L Gary; Dorothy A Caputo; Beth Waitzfelder; Catherine Kim; Gloria L Beckles Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: G T O'Connor; H B Quinton; N D Traven; L D Ramunno; T A Dodds; T A Marciniak; J E Wennberg Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-02-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Viola Vaccarino; Saif S Rathore; Nanette K Wenger; Paul D Frederick; Jerome L Abramson; Hal V Barron; Ajay Manhapra; Susmita Mallik; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-08-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Natalia A Zhivan; Alfonso Ang; Hortensia Amaro; William A Vega; Kyriakos S Markides Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: James B Wetmore; Jonathan D Mahnken; Sally K Rigler; Edward F Ellerbeck; Purna Mukhopadhyay; Qingjiang Hou; Theresa I Shireman Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2012-12-28 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: James Studnicki; Bola F Ekezue; Maka Tsulukidze; Peggy Honoré; Ramal Moonesinghe; John Fisher Journal: Am J Med Qual Date: 2013-03-24 Impact factor: 1.852