ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2019
Socially Assigned Race and Diabetes: Findings from the Arizona Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2013-2014.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-identified Race and Ethnicity and How this is Perceived: Associations with the Physical and Mental Health of Incarcerated Individuals.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Why the Gap in Evaluating the Social Constructs and the Value of Medicines?PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Who declines to respond to the reactions to race module?: findings from the South Carolina Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2016-2017.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Socially-assigned race and health: a scoping review with global implications for population health equity.International journal for equity in health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Socially assigned race, the racial/ethnic categorization of individuals by others, may serve as the basis for differential or unfair treatment. Latinxs are commonly socially assigned to a race/ethnicity with which they do not self-identify. However, it is unclear the degree to which self-identified Latinxs who are socially assigned as white or Latinx may differentially predict health outcomes beyond general health status and healthcare utilization. We examine the association between socially assigned race and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Data from the Arizona's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2013, 2014) was used in a cross-sectional analysis (restricted to Latinxs and non-Hispanic whites; N = 8370) to examine the association between self-identified (SI) and socially assigned (SA) race/ethnicity agreement and T2DM. Latinxs were categorized according to SI-SA race/ethnicity agreement: discordant (SI-SA, different) and concordant (SI-SA, same). T2DM was based on self-reported physician diagnosis. Data were analyzed using Poisson regression models to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Latinxs comprised 28.5% of our sample, of which, 18.5% was discordant and 81.5% was concordant. In fully adjusted models, concordant Latinxs were more likely to have T2DM than whites (aPR 2.01, 95% CI 1.44, 2.82). There were no significant differences in T2DM between discordant Latinxs and whites. Our results suggest that socially assigned race is an understudied determinant of health and may further understanding of the impact of racial stratification on Latinx health inequities. Additional research examining socially assigned race and other health outcomes are warranted to gain further insight of the biological impact of racialized lived experiences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31065999What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.