ArticleHealth equity
Antiracist Practices Across the Stages of a Research Project: A Narrative Review.
Article in Health equity. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: There is a need for formal guidance around antiracist research practices to dismantle structural racism, which has been embedded into the design and conduct of health sciences research. Our objective is to review and summarize recommendations from published literature published on antiracist research practices applicable to all health sciences research studies. Method: In 2022, we systematically reviewed PubMed, SCOPUS, Excerpta Medica Database, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Sociological Abstracts using search terms about antiracist research. We found 5362 papers, screened 3962 titles, assessed 171 abstracts for eligibility, and reviewed 103 using a standardized extraction form. We reviewed 11 papers twice to confirm accuracy. We narratively synthesized recommendations relevant to six stages of the research process via combined deductive and inductive qualitative analysis. Results: A total of 1407 individual recommendations were grouped into themes and subthemes within each research stage. Project development had the most themes (n = 7) and subthemes (n = 24); dissemination of findings had the fewest (2 themes and 5 subthemes). When designing a project, researchers are encouraged to develop diverse, representative, and empowered research teams; design projects important to marginalized groups; and use conceptual frameworks that build on the work of marginalized scholars. Researchers were encouraged to promote inclusive consent processes, accessible recruitment materials, and recruitment and retention strategies that maximized diversity. When analyzing data, recommendations included involving community partners to ensure appropriate conceptualization and measurement of race, justifying the selection of reference groups, and considering intersectional identities. Recommendations for data interpretation include contextualizing findings, considering structural racism, and improving community involvement to enhance the transparency of data analysis. During dissemination, recommendations highlighted increasing accessibility of research findings. Conclusions: We identified a comprehensive list of recommendations describing antiracist research practices. Our synthesis can be used to guide individual research teams, institutional review boards, and grant committees, and to develop educational curricula around antiracist research practices.
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.