Lives matter. Do votes? Invited commentary on "Black lives matter: Differential mortality and the racial composition of the U.S. electorate, 1970-2004".

Jonathan Purtle

Abstract readComment

In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

Substance Use among Economically Disadvantaged African American Older Adults; Objective and Subjective Socioeconomic Status.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

Comment on
Black lives matter: Differential mortality and the racial composition of the U.S. electorate, 1970-2004.2015

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jonathan PurtleDepartment of Health Management & Policy, School of Public Health, Drexel University, Nesbitt Hall, 3rd Floor, 3215 Market St., Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: jonathan.purtle@Drexel.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Racial health disparities in the United States are produced and perpetuated through public policies that differentially allocate risks and resources for health. Elected officials have the ability modify the structural determinants of racial health disparities through policy decisions and, through voting, the electorate can influence the extent to which these policy decisions promote health equity. In this commentary, I synthesize research on the voting behavior of electorates and policy decisions and present strategies to foster sociopolitical environments that are conducive to the implementation and enforcement of racial health disparity reduction initiatives. There is a need for research that contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of the role of voting in health policy making processes and further development of empirically-based policy advocacy strategies.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesPoliticsBlack or African AmericanHumansMortality, PrematureElectorateHealth disparitiesHealth policyPolitical inequalityPremature mortalityRaceVoting

Identifiers

PMID25990797

DOI10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.05.017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.