ArticleAJPM focus2025
Disparities in Discrimination Distress Among U.S. Youth.
Article in AJPM focus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived Unfair Police Treatment and Recent Substance Use Among Male Youth Residing in Pittsburgh: Cross-Sectional Findings from a Randomized Control Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Trial
- Discrimination Distress and Current Combustible and Non-combustible Tobacco Product Use Among US Youth, 2023.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Racial and ethnic discrimination differentially affects youth in the U.S. However, evidence of U.S. youth discriminatory experiences at the national level is scant. Methods: Using data from the 2023 National Youth Tobacco Survey on youth aged ≥9 years (N=22,069), the authors used the 15-item Adolescent Discrimination Distress Index to create a binary indicator of any discrimination and mean summary scale (i.e., overall) and subscales (i.e., educational, institutional, and peer) representing frequencies of distress. The authors estimated the distribution of each discrimination measure overall and examined differences by the intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity. Results: More than half the sample (56.2%) experienced any discrimination, with proportions highest among non-Hispanic Asian female youth (78.4%). The mean overall discrimination distress score was 0.32 (95% CI=0.29, 0.34), and youth reported higher levels of educational discrimination distress (mean=0.38; 95% CI=0.35, 0.40) than peer (mean=0.32; 95% CI=0.29, 0.35) and institutional (mean=0.26; 95% CI=0.23, 0.28) distress. Most gender and racial and ethnic minoritized youth reported higher levels of overall distress than non-Hispanic White males and females, with levels generally highest for groups such as Hispanic female (mean=0.49; 95% CI=0.44, 0.55), non-Hispanic Black female (mean=0.47; 95% CI=0.41, 0.53), and non-Hispanic multiracial female (mean=0.45; 95% CI=0.30, 0.59) youth. Conclusions: Gender and racial and ethnic minoritized youth experience higher levels of discrimination distress than non-Hispanic White male and female youth, with variation observed by type of discrimination. Efforts mitigating discrimination for specific at-risk populations are needed to promote health equity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.