4.5 Article

A Race-Conscious Approach Toward Research on Racial Inequities in Palliative Care

Journal

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
Volume 63, Issue 5, Pages E465-E471

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.11.012

Keywords

Public health critical race praxis; critical race theory; racial inequities; palliative care; end-of-life care

Funding

  1. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities [K23MD015270-02]
  2. National Institutes of Health
  3. Cambia Health Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Racial inequities in palliative and end-of-life care have been well-documented but often overlooked due to a lack of consideration for the effects of race and everyday racism. Public Health Critical Race Praxis provides a new approach for researchers to address racial disparities by broadening research priorities and developing race-conscious interventions.
Racial inequities in palliative and end-of-life care have been well-documented for many years. This inequity is long-standing and resistant to many intervention efforts. One reason for this may be that research in racial inequity in palliative care, and the interventions developed, do not account for the effects of race and the everyday racism that patients of color experience while navigating the healthcare system. Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP) offers researchers new routes of inquiry to broaden the scope of research priorities in palliative care and improving racial outcomes through a novel conceptual framework and methodology. PHCRP, based off critical race theory (CRT), contains 10 principles within four foci to guide researchers toward a more race conscious approach for the generation of research questions, research processes, and development of interventions targeting racial inequities. (C) 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available