Johns Hopkins University: On Racism: A New Standard For Publishing On Racial Health Inequities

Johns Hopkins University featured this article today here: "Signs of progress: ... the term “racism” didn’t belong in a scientific paper; now it is increasingly seen as a legitimate area of scientific study."

Once upon a time e.g. Eugenics, Phlogiston, Miasma theory were also considered a legitimate subject of scientific study! See also my An Inconvenient History of Science.

Beware when ideological demagoguery and indoctrination infiltrates science!  This is a totalitarian approach!

"... To address the shortcomings listed above, we propose several standards for publishing on racial health inequities, intended for researchers, journals, and peer reviewers.

Researchers

• Define race during the experimental design, and specify the reason for its use in the study. Such definitions should be couched within a sociopolitical framework, not a biological one, that explicitly reviews all relevant social, environmental, and structural factors for which race may serve as a proxy measure. For the reader, these additional details enable careful interpretation of study results and implications. But for authors, it engenders critical thinking about racial constructs that prevent the reification of race as a biological entity.
• Name racism, identify the form (interpersonal, institutional, or internalized), the mechanism by which it may be operating, and other intersecting forms of oppression (such as based on sex, sexual orientation, age, regionality, nationality, religion, or income) that may compound its effects. A critical race theory framework lends authors a vocabulary for discussing racism and its potential relationship to the study’s findings. And naming racism explicitly helps authors avoid incorrectly assigning race as a risk factor, when racism is the risk factor for racially disparate outcomes.
• Never offer genetic interpretations of race because such suppositions are not grounded in science. If race and genetics are being expressed jointly, painstakingly delineate the intended implication.
• Solicit patient input. Use community review boards or form patient panels to ensure the outcomes of research reflect the priorities of the populations studied.
• Identify the stakes. “All policy is health policy,” and all research on racial health inequities has implications for broader public policy and clinical practice. Inform readers of these potential applications.
• Cite the experts, particularly scholars of color whose work forms the basis of the field’s knowledge on racism and its effects.

Journals

• Reject articles on racial health inequities that fail to rigorously examine racism. This will require continuing education on the part of existing editorial staff and efforts to hire and promote new editors who are well versed in critical race theory and its application.
• Revisit editorial and publication guidelines, including the uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals, regularly to ensure they capture the evolution of racial definitions and sociopolitical structures. Publicly share the guidelines online and with peer journals.
• Consider compensating reviewers particularly reviewers of color who are often asked to share their expertise without remuneration.
• Use experienced reviewers who have demonstrated, through their own scholarship and work, facility with racism and its pathophysiologic mechanisms.

Reviewers

• Be critical of work that reifies biological race or provides a genetic basis for racial differences in health outcomes. Inform the editors and authors that such statements are unsubstantiated and request clear explanations of suggested genetic etiologies to ensure such claims are not misinterpreted as biological race.
• Review the citations and when appropriate recommend authors expand their literature review to include the wealth of data on racism.
• Consult experts and inform the editors if one’s individual expertise is insufficient to advise regarding an important aspect of the paper from study design and methodology to the analysis.
• Closing the gap in racial health outcomes in the United States will only be accomplished by identifying, confronting, and abolishing racism as an American tradition and root of inequity."

On Racism: A New Standard For Publishing On Racial Health Inequities | Health Affairs