ArticleBMC public health2025
A scoping review of intersectional health research related to the COVID-19 pandemic in North America: key findings.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intersectional inequalities in COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality: A nationwide MAIHDA study of Swedish adults across four pandemic waves (2020-2022).SSM - population health · 2026Article
- Increased Experiences of Multiple Forms of Discrimination in Healthcare Settings During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among African, Caribbean, and Black (ACB) People Across Canada: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Intersectional inequalities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality in Sweden: a retrospective population-based cohort study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis scoping review maps the key findings of intersectional research related to the COVID-19 pandemic in North America. Intersectional approaches highlight how overlapping systems of oppression shape health and social outcomes.
methodsA total of 21 studies were included, comprising 10 quantitative, 8 qualitative, and 3 mixed-methods designs. Studies were reviewed to assess the use of intersectional research methods and to identify common findings across the literature.
resultsIntersectional research methods are increasingly utilized in pandemic-related studies in North America. Thematic analysis revealed five key themes: deepening disparities in health care systems, barriers to accessing social services, changes to working conditions across economic sectors, impacts of lockdown restrictions, and impacts on mental health. This review also found that interruptions to community connections influenced access to resources, shaping life chances for some populations. Importantly, intersectional research related to the pandemic has often decentralized race, which contrasts with broader non-intersectional studies.
conclusionsFindings underscore the need for public health policies informed by intersectional frameworks. Inequities related to class, race, and gender highlight the importance of disaggregated data collection as standard practice. Targeted interventions, such as workplace protections for racialized women in precarious jobs, are critical to addressing compounded vulnerabilities and ensuring equity in pandemic responses.
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.