OBJECTIVE: To carry out a critical review of the literature on the use of race, color, and ethnicity in the field of public health dentistry. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed for articles published between 2014 and 2019. Using a data extraction form, we collected information on (1) bibliographic characteristics of the selected papers; (2) race, color, and ethnicity of the study participants and their sociodemographic profiles; and (3) the extent to which the original publications followed the recommendations by Kaplan and Bennett (2003) on the use of race, color, or ethnicity in biomedical research. RESULTS: Our initial search identified 2,032 articles, 53 of which were selected for full-text examination and assessment following pre-established eligibility criteria. Around 60% (n = 32) of the included studies did not justify the use of race, color, or ethnicity in their analyses, and 9% (n = 5) took these variables as indicators of the participants' genetic makeup. On the other hand, 68% (n = 36) of the reviewed papers considered race, color, and ethnicity as risk markers - not risk factors - for adverse oral health outcomes, whereas 80% (n = 42) adjusted racial/ethnic inequities for a range of socioeconomic and demographic factors in statistical models. Only one study (2%) explicitly took race, color, or ethnicity as a contextually dependent dimension of the participants' identities. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that research on oral health inequities is often based on reductionist and stigmatizing conceptions of race, color, or ethnicity. Such harmful misconceptions should be replaced with anti-racist narratives in order to effectively address racial oral health inequities.
OBJECTIVE: To carry out a critical review of the literature on the use of race, color, and ethnicity in the field of public health dentistry. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed for articles published between 2014 and 2019. Using a data extraction form, we collected information on (1) bibliographic characteristics of the selected papers; (2) race, color, and ethnicity of the study participants and their sociodemographic profiles; and (3) the extent to which the original publications followed the recommendations by Kaplan and Bennett (2003) on the use of race, color, or ethnicity in biomedical research. RESULTS: Our initial search identified 2,032 articles, 53 of which were selected for full-text examination and assessment following pre-established eligibility criteria. Around 60% (n = 32) of the included studies did not justify the use of race, color, or ethnicity in their analyses, and 9% (n = 5) took these variables as indicators of the participants' genetic makeup. On the other hand, 68% (n = 36) of the reviewed papers considered race, color, and ethnicity as risk markers - not risk factors - for adverse oral health outcomes, whereas 80% (n = 42) adjusted racial/ethnic inequities for a range of socioeconomic and demographic factors in statistical models. Only one study (2%) explicitly took race, color, or ethnicity as a contextually dependent dimension of the participants' identities. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that research on oral health inequities is often based on reductionist and stigmatizing conceptions of race, color, or ethnicity. Such harmful misconceptions should be replaced with anti-racist narratives in order to effectively address racial oral health inequities.
Authors: John J Warren; Margherita Fontana; Derek R Blanchette; Deborah V Dawson; David R Drake; Steven M Levy; Justine L Kolker; Kathy R Phipps Journal: J Public Health Dent Date: 2016-03-18 Impact factor: 1.821
Authors: Greta R Bauer; Siobhan M Churchill; Mayuri Mahendran; Chantel Walwyn; Daniel Lizotte; Alma Angelica Villa-Rueda Journal: SSM Popul Health Date: 2021-04-16