Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding01:25

Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding

Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data01:25

Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data

Epidemiological data primarily involves information on specific populations' occurrence, distribution, and determinants of health and diseases. This data is crucial for understanding disease patterns and impacts, aiding public health decision-making and disease prevention strategies. The analysis of epidemiological data employs various statistical methods to interpret health-related data effectively. Here are some commonly used methods:
Study Designs in Epidemiology01:20

Study Designs in Epidemiology

Epidemiological study designs are fundamental tools for investigating the distribution, determinants, and control of health conditions in populations. They help researchers understand the relationships between exposures and outcomes, and they broadly fall into two categories: "observational" and "experimental" studies.
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies.
Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

Relative risk (RR) is a statistical measure commonly used in epidemiology to compare the likelihood of a particular event occurring between two groups. This metric is important for evaluating the relationship between exposure to a specific risk factor and the probability of a particular outcome. It plays a crucial role in medical research, public health studies, and risk assessment. Relative risk quantifies how much more (or less) likely an event is to occur in an exposed group compared to an...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Childhood Family Violence and Tobacco, E-Cigarette, and Alcohol Use Among Adolescents: A Large School-Based Study in China.

Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

A potent small-chemical MBD2 inhibitor, KCC-07, induces selective cytotoxicity in hepatocellular and prostate cancer cells.

Molecular biology reports·2026
Same author

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Health Service Utilization Among Non-Hispanic Black and Non-Hispanic White Men: Findings From Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

American journal of men's health·2026
Same author

In Reference to Multi-Institutional Endoscopic Resection and Reconstitution for Idiopathic Subglottic Stenosis.

The Laryngoscope·2026
Same author

Reflections on Oral Beta Blocker Therapy and Long-term Outcomes after Myocardial Infarction in Preserved Left Ventricular Function.

Cardiovascular drugs and therapy·2026
Same author

Understanding the Influence of Income Inequality and Violent Crime on Police Fatal Shootings in U.S. Counties: 2015-2022.

Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 28, 2026

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects
08:13

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects

Published on: May 10, 2019

Measuring Structural Racism to Advance Health Equity: A Scoping Review of Quantitative Approaches.

Darrell J Gaskin1,2, Ali Iftikhar3, Emmanuel Animashaun3

  • 1Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. dgaskin1@jh.edu.

Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
|May 27, 2026
PubMed
Summary

Quantifying structural racism is crucial for addressing health inequities. Standardized measures are needed to identify disparities and guide interventions for racial health equity in the U.S.

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 28, 2026

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects
08:13

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects

Published on: May 10, 2019

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Health Equity Research
  • Sociomedical Sciences

Background:

  • Structural racism systematically disadvantages communities of color, driving health inequities in the U.S.
  • Current public health lacks standardized tools to measure structural racism, hindering interventions.
  • Recognition of structural racism's health impact is growing, but measurement remains a challenge.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review methods for quantifying structural racism in relation to health outcomes.
  • To identify domains and metrics used to operationalize structural racism in research.
  • To assess trends in measurement approaches for structural racism.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines.
  • Searched PubMed and Scopus for peer-reviewed studies (2000-2025) on structural racism and U.S. health outcomes.
  • Included 28 studies meeting specific inclusion criteria.

Main Results:

  • Structural racism quantified across seven domains: education, socioeconomic status, judicial, residential, political, healthcare, and historical.
  • Metrics included disparities in education, incarceration, unemployment, poverty, and voter turnout.
  • These measures consistently correlate with adverse health outcomes like infant mortality and cardiovascular disease.

Conclusions:

  • Quantifying structural racism is essential for dismantling systemic inequities and promoting health equity.
  • Greater methodological consistency and cross-sectoral frameworks are needed for effective measurement.
  • Standardized, multidimensional measures can inform policy and resource allocation for racial health equity.