0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Barriers to and opportunities for advancing racial equity in cervical cancer screening in the United States

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In the United States (U.S.), racially minoritized people have higher rates of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality compared to white individuals as a result of racialized structural, social, economic, and health care inequities. However, cervical cancer screening guidelines are based on studies of predominately white individuals and do not substantially discuss or address racialized cervical cancer inequities and their social determinants, including racism.

          Methods

          We conducted in-depth interviews with health care providers ( N = 30) and key informants with expertise in health equity ( N = 18). We utilized semi-structured interview guides that addressed providers’ views and experiences delivering cervical cancer screening to racially minoritized individuals and key informants’ recommendations for advancing racial equity in the development and implementation of cervical cancer screening guidelines. Interviews were analyzed using a template style thematic analysis approach involving deductive and inductive coding, memo writing, and matrix analysis for theme development.

          Results

          Most health care providers adopted a universal, one-size-fits-all approach to cervical cancer screening with the stated goal of ensuring racial equality. Despite frequently acknowledging the existence of racialized cervical cancer inequities, few providers recognized the role of social inequities in influencing them, and none discussed the impact of racism. In contrast, key informants overwhelmingly recommended that providers adopt an approach to cervical cancer screening and follow-up care that recognizes the role of racism in shaping racialized cervical cancer and related social inequities, is developed in partnership with racially minoritized communities, and involves person-centered, structurally-competent, and trauma-informed practices that address racially minoritized peoples' unique lived experiences in historical and social context. This racism-conscious approach is not to be confused with race-based medicine, which is an essentialist and racist approach to health care that treats race as a biological variable rather than as a social and political construct.

          Conclusions

          Developers and implementers of cervical cancer screening guidelines should explicitly recognize and address the impact of racism on cervical cancer screening, follow-up care, and outcomes, meaningfully incorporate racially minoritized communities' perspectives and experiences, and facilitate provider- and institutional-level practices that foster racial equity in cervical cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references96

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

          Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions

            The Lancet, 389(10077), 1453-1463
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Demonstrating Rigor Using Thematic Analysis: A Hybrid Approach of Inductive and Deductive Coding and Theme Development

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                madina_agenor@brown.edu
                Journal
                BMC Womens Health
                BMC Womens Health
                BMC Women's Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1472-6874
                21 June 2024
                21 June 2024
                2024
                : 24
                : 362
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.40263.33, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9094, Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, , Brown University School of Public Health, ; Providence, RI USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.40263.33, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9094, Center for Health Promotion and Health Equity, , Brown University School of Public Health, ; Providence, RI USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.40263.33, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9094, Department of Epidemiology, , Brown University School of Public Health, ; MPH Box G-S121-4, Providence, RI 02912 USA
                [4 ]The Fenway Institute, Fenway Health, ( https://ror.org/04ztdzs79) Boston, MA USA
                [5 ]Larner College of Medicine, University of Vermont, ( https://ror.org/0155zta11) Burlington, VT USA
                [6 ]Department of Sociology, Northeastern University, ( https://ror.org/04t5xt781) Boston, MA USA
                [7 ]Teachers College, Columbia University, ( https://ror.org/00hj8s172) New York, NY USA
                [8 ]Department of Family Medicine, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, ( https://ror.org/05gq02987) Providence, RI USA
                [9 ]GRID grid.38142.3c, ISNI 000000041936754X, Department of Medicine, , Harvard Medical School, ; Boston, MA USA
                [10 ]Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, ( https://ror.org/04drvxt59) Boston, MA USA
                [11 ]GRID grid.38142.3c, ISNI 000000041936754X, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, , Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, ; Boston, MA USA
                [12 ]Division of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine, Boston Children’s Hospital, ( https://ror.org/00dvg7y05) Boston, MA USA
                [13 ]GRID grid.38142.3c, ISNI 000000041936754X, Department of Pediatrics, , Harvard Medical School, ; Boston, MA USA
                Article
                3151
                10.1186/s12905-024-03151-7
                11191319
                38907205
                3c266118-2eab-4cf3-91be-f19313b92980
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 27 October 2023
                : 17 May 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002, National Institutes of Health;
                Award ID: K01CA234226-01
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                cervical cancer,screening,clinical guidelines,racism,health equity,health care providers

                Comments

                Comment on this article