How Structural Racism Has Deterred Minorities from Pursuing Medicine
A recent report from the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine explains how structural racism has deterred minority communities from pursuing or remaining in careers in STEMM, including medicine.
Source: Getty Images
- A report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, titled Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEMM Organizations, explained how structural racism has deterred minorities from pursuing and continuing careers in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). Additionally, the report provides recommendations on how to correct the issue.
The report notes that historical laws and policies have contributed to the unequal representation of minority groups in STEMM. Despite becoming a growing part of the population, Black, Indigenous, and Latino people are not proportionally represented in STEMM fields.
Among the many recommendations proposed in this report, one suggests that predominantly White institutions (PWIs) analyze and apply principles adopted by minority-serving institutions (MSIs) across STEMM education and organizations.
Additional recommendations include hiring more minority individuals in leadership and education positions, conducting “cultural audits” to assess inclusion, and including antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion requirements or standards.
The lack of minority individuals in these groups has a widespread impact, extending far beyond a person’s individual accomplishments and perpetuating racism and inequity across healthcare. In nearly every aspect of healthcare, White patients are better off than their Black or minority counterparts.
In the past year alone, the healthcare industry has identified racial bias in pulse oximeters and thermometers. The designs do little to account for variations in skin tones, catering primarily to White or fair-skinned individuals. The effects of these differences are more than just inaccurate measurements; in many cases, this data is used to determine condition severity and treatment regimens. An erroneous reading may result in inadequate care.
Beyond medical devices, clinical trials and medical research have repeatedly excluded or underrepresented Black patients. A Phesi analysis published in 2022 reported that, despite having the highest cancer-related death rate, over 40% of cancer clinical trials in the United States did not have any Black patients.
The drastic statistics and repeated occurrences cannot simply be attributed to oversight and are easily linked to bias, conscious or unconscious. The lack of representation in the medical industry consistently disadvantages Black and minority Americans. According to a report published by the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC), only 5% of physicians identify as Black, and 6% identify as Hispanic, even though they make up significantly more of the general population.
The lack of representation trickles into patient care and patient outcomes. Many studies have reported that Black and minority patients receive better care when treated by a provider of the same background. A recent article published in Harvard Business News notes that Black men treated by Black doctors were more likely to receive preventative services than White doctors.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommendations may help diversify the medical industry, improving patient care for all populations.
