Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38537165›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2024

Slavery and Its Afterlives in US Psychiatry.

Èlodie Edwards-Grossi, Christopher D E Willoughby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2024. 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.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Èlodie Edwards-GrossiÈlodie Edwards-Grossi is with the Institut Universitaire de France and the Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Sciences Sociales, Université Paris Dauphine-PSL, Paris, France. Christopher D. E. Willoughby is with the African American and African Diaspora Studies Program and the Department of Interdisciplinary, Gender, and Ethnic Studies, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Christopher D E WilloughbyÈlodie Edwards-Grossi is with the Institut Universitaire de France and the Institut de Recherche Interdisciplinaire en Sciences Sociales, Université Paris Dauphine-PSL, Paris, France. Christopher D. E. Willoughby is with the African American and African Diaspora Studies Program and the Department of Interdisciplinary, Gender, and Ethnic Studies, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antecedents of racist treatments of Black patients by the psychiatric profession in the United States affect the way they view treatment today. Specifically, in this essay, we explore the enduring consequences of racial science on various treatment practices. We examined a range of primary sources on the history of racial theories about the mind, medical and psychiatric publications, and hospitals. We contextualize this analysis by examining the secondary literature in the history and sociology of psychiatry. Through analyzing racial thinking from the antebellum through the Jim Crow periods, we show how US medicine and psychiatry have roots in antebellum racial science and how carceral logics underpinned the past and present politics of Black mental health. Changing this trajectory requires practitioners to interrogate the historical foundations of racist psychiatric concepts. This essay urges them to reject biological racial realism, which bears reminiscences to 19th-century racial science, and embrace the variable of race as a social construct to study social inequalities in health as a first step toward moving away from the legacies of past injustices in medicine. (

Indexed as

Black or African AmericanEnslavementPsychiatryHumansMental HealthSocioeconomic FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID38537165
PMCPMC10976453

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.