MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284677573 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1769321/v1

Structural interventions that affect racial inequities and their impact on population health outcomes: a systematic review

2022· review· en· W4284677573 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily Clark, Emily D. Cranston, Tionné Polin, Sume Ndumbe-Eyoh, Danielle A. Macdonald, Claire Betker, Maureen Dobbins

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersSt. Francis Xavier UniversityPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsPsychological interventionRacismHealth equitySocioeconomic statusSocial determinants of healthEquity (law)Political sciencePublic economicsEconomic growthPopulationHealth careEnvironmental healthMedicineEconomicsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Structural racism is the historical and ongoing reinforcement of racism within society due to discriminatory systems and inequitable distribution of key resources. Racism, embedded within institutional structures, processes and values, perpetuates historical injustices and restricts access to structural factors that directly impact health, such as housing, education and employment. Due to the complex and pervasive nature of structural racism, interventions that act at the structural level, rather than the individual level, are necessary to improve racial health equity. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effects of structural-level interventions on determinants of health and health outcomes for racialized populations. A total of 28 articles are included in this review, analyzing interventions such as supplemental income programs, minimum wage policies, nutrition safeguard programs, immigration-related policies, and reproductive and family-based policies. Most studies were quasi-experimental or natural experiments. Findings of studies were largely mixed, although there were clear benefits to policies that improve socioeconomic status and opportunities, and demonstrable harms from policies that restrict access to abortion or immigration. Overall, research on the effects of structural-level interventions to address health inequities is lacking, and the evidence base would benefit from well-designed studies on upstream policy interventions that effect the structural determinants of health and health inequities and improve daily living conditions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.649
GPT teacher head0.664
Teacher spread0.015 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207