OBJECTIVE: Despite evidence that discrimination within the health care system may play an important role in perpetuating health disparities, instruments designed to measure discrimination within the health care setting have not been adequately tested or validated. Consequently, we sought to test the psychometric properties of a modified version of the Everyday Discrimination scale, adapted for medical settings. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Academic medical center in Chicago. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-four African American patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured factor analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. RESULTS: Seventy-four participants completed the baseline interviews and 66 participants (89%) completed the follow-up interviews. Eighty percent were women. The Discrimination in Medical Settings (DMS) Scale had a single factor solution (eigenvalue of 4.36), a Cronbach's alpha of 0.89 and test-retest reliability of .58 (P<.0001). The DMS was significantly correlated with an overall measure of societal discrimination (EOD) (r=.51, P<.001) as well as two of its three subscales (unfair: r=-.04, P=.76; discrimination: r=.45, P<0.001; worry: r=-.36, P=.002). The DMS was associated with the overall African American Trust in Health Care Scale (r=.27, P=.02) as well as two key subscales (racism: r=.31, P<.001; disrespect: r=.44, P<.001). The DMS scale was inversely associated with the Social Desirability Scale (r=.18, P=.13). The DMS scale was not correlated with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (r=.03, P=.80). CONCLUSIONS: The Discrimination in Medical Settings Scale has excellent internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity among our sample of African American patients. Further testing is warranted among other racial/ethnic groups.
OBJECTIVE: Despite evidence that discrimination within the health care system may play an important role in perpetuating health disparities, instruments designed to measure discrimination within the health care setting have not been adequately tested or validated. Consequently, we sought to test the psychometric properties of a modified version of the Everyday Discrimination scale, adapted for medical settings. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Academic medical center in Chicago. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-four African American patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured factor analysis, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. RESULTS: Seventy-four participants completed the baseline interviews and 66 participants (89%) completed the follow-up interviews. Eighty percent were women. The Discrimination in Medical Settings (DMS) Scale had a single factor solution (eigenvalue of 4.36), a Cronbach's alpha of 0.89 and test-retest reliability of .58 (P<.0001). The DMS was significantly correlated with an overall measure of societal discrimination (EOD) (r=.51, P<.001) as well as two of its three subscales (unfair: r=-.04, P=.76; discrimination: r=.45, P<0.001; worry: r=-.36, P=.002). The DMS was associated with the overall African American Trust in Health Care Scale (r=.27, P=.02) as well as two key subscales (racism: r=.31, P<.001; disrespect: r=.44, P<.001). The DMS scale was inversely associated with the Social Desirability Scale (r=.18, P=.13). The DMS scale was not correlated with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (r=.03, P=.80). CONCLUSIONS: The Discrimination in Medical Settings Scale has excellent internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity among our sample of African American patients. Further testing is warranted among other racial/ethnic groups.
Authors: Tené T Lewis; Susan A Everson-Rose; Lynda H Powell; Karen A Matthews; Charlotte Brown; Kelly Karavolos; Kim Sutton-Tyrrell; Elizabeth Jacobs; Deidre Wesley Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2006 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Serena MacDonald; Leslie R M Hausmann; Florentina E Sileanu; Xinhua Zhao; Maria K Mor; Sonya Borrero Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Serena MacDonald; Colleen Judge-Golden; Sonya Borrero; Xinhua Zhao; Maria K Mor; Leslie R M Hausmann Journal: Med Care Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Clarissa Baratin; Erik Beune; Daan van Schalkwijk; Karlijn Meeks; Liam Smeeth; Juliet Addo; Ama de-Graft Aikins; Ellis Owusu-Dabo; Silver Bahendeka; Frank P Mockenhaupt; Ina Danquah; Matthias B Schulze; Joachim Spranger; Daniel Boateng; Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch; Karien Stronks; Charles Agyemang Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2019-03-11 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Ruth-Alma N Turkson-Ocran; Sarah L Szanton; Lisa A Cooper; Sherita H Golden; Rexford S Ahima; Nancy Perrin; Yvonne Commodore-Mensah Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 1.847