Racism in Health Services for Adolescents: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Addressing racism within health systems and services is critical to addressing health vulnerabilities and promoting health equity for racialized populations. Currently, there is limited knowledge about the ways in which racism affects health services for adolescents. A scoping review was undertaken following the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis methodology and guided by the research questions: (1) What are the characteristics of the literature examining racism in health service use for adolescents? (2) What are the foci of the literature on systemic racism and health services for adolescents? A systematic literature search was conducted in April 2021 to identify all relevant published studies. The search identified 3049 unique articles, with a total of 13 articles included in this review. Multiple levels of racism were examined in the included articles across various health care settings. Five foci were identified: racism prevention, missed care, quality of care, racial bias, and experiences of racism. Our review indicates a current emphasis on interpersonal racism within this field of study, with emergent discussion of the impact of systemic racism. However, greater attention is needed that would investigate multiple forms of racism (institutional, interpersonal, internalized) in relation to specific contexts and adolescent populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".