Abstract
Introduction
This study examined how perceived racial privilege and perceived racial discrimination in health care varied with race and socioeconomic status (SES).
Methods
The sample consisted of white, black, and Native American respondents to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2005–2013) who had sought health care in the past 12 months. Multiple logistic regression models of perceived racial privilege and perceived discrimination were estimated. Analyses were performed in 2016.
Results
Perceptions of racial privilege were less common among blacks and Native Americans compared with whites, while perceptions of racial discrimination were more common among these minorities. In whites, higher income and education contributed to increased perceptions of privileged treatment and decreased perceptions of discrimination. The pattern was reversed in blacks, who reported more discrimination and less privilege at higher income and education levels. Across racial groups, respondents who reported foregone medical care due to cost had higher risk of perceived racial discrimination. Health insurance contributed to less perceived racial discrimination and more perceived privilege only among whites.
Conclusions
SES is an important social determinant of perceived privilege and perceived discrimination in health care, but its role varies by indicator and racial group. Whites with low education or no health insurance, well-educated blacks, and individuals who face cost-related barriers to care are at increased risk of perceived discrimination. Policies and interventions to reduce these perceptions should target structural and systemic factors, including society-wide inequalities in income, education, and healthcare access, and should be tailored to account for racially specific healthcare experiences.
Introduction
Perceived racial discrimination, defined as a perception of unfair treatment because of one's race, is a prominent health risk factor associated with a range of adverse outcomes, from cardiovascular disease to low birth weight, smoking, and poor self-reported health.1-7 Although discrimination can occur in various life domains, discrimination in healthcare settings is of particular concern because of its negative implications for preventive care. Patients who report perceived discrimination tend to forego preventive services,8-10 postpone medical tests and treatment,11 and underutilize health services in general12; they also report worse physician– patient communication and lower satisfaction with care,13,14 which may contribute to poorer compliance and adherence.15
Perceived racial privilege is another aspect of racial relations16 potentially relevant for healthcare delivery. Perceived racial privilege is the awareness of having an advantaged status because of one's racial background. Much like racial discrimination, racial privilege is a product of systemic racism and may contribute to health and well-being outcomes.17 In health research, however, racial privilege is an understudied concept,18 and its determinants are not well known.
The contribution of this study is examining how perceived racial privilege and perceived racial discrimination vary with race and SES, two critical social determinants of health. Prior research leaves little doubt that whites are less likely to report discrimination compared to other racial groups19 and the evidence suggests that perceived racial discrimination further varies with SES. Higher income, for instance, has been linked to lower perceived discrimination in a diverse sample of Californians20 and among white women.21 Lower education has been associated with perceptions of discrimination in general, not limited to health care,21 but experiences within the healthcare system may differ from those in other life domains. Unique health-related factors, such as insurance status22 and cost-associated access barriers, may be important. This warrants examination of multiple dimensions of SES in relation to perceived racial treatment specifically in the area of health care.
In the sociologic literature, race and socioeconomic status are understood as fundamental causes of health, that is, distal causal factors that continuously generate downstream, proximate risk factors affecting population health across societies and historical contexts.23-25 Consistent with this theory, whites typically have better health outcomes when compared with blacks and Native Americans.26-28 Importantly, within each racial group, socioeconomic status stratifies health further, with socially advantaged individuals having better outcomes compared with their less advantaged counterparts.29,30
Building on the fundamental cause framework, it is expected that perceptions of privileged treatment will be more common among socially advantaged healthcare users, including whites (Hypothesis 1 [H1]) and individuals with higher SES (Hypothesis 2 [H2]), whereas perceptions of racial discrimination will be less common in these advantaged populations. In addition to income and education as two commonly studied dimensions of SES, the present study focuses on health insurance and foregone medical care because of cost, as they are additional aspects of SES with special relevance for health. The hypotheses are:
H1: Blacks and Native Americans are more likely to report racial discrimination and less likely to report racial privilege in health care compared with whites.
H2(a): Higher education is related to lower likelihood of reporting racial discrimination and higher likelihood of reporting racial privilege in health care.
H2(b): Higher income is related to lower likelihood of reporting racial discrimination and higher likelihood of reporting racial privilege in health care.
H2(c): Compared with individuals without health insurance, individuals with health insurance are less likely to report racial discrimination and more likely to report racial privilege in health care.
H2(d): Individuals having foregone medical care due to cost are more likely to report racial discrimination and less likely to report racial privilege in health care compared with those who have not foregone medical care due to cost.
An important aspect of this study is evaluating the role of socioeconomic factors in perceived racial discrimination and privilege in health care by individual racial group. Racial comparisons of these factors have rarely been attempted, especially beyond black versus white. Such comparisons are important because different racial groups have different experiences in the healthcare system,31 and perceptions of unfair or privileged treatment may operate uniquely within each group. This study specifically focuses on blacks and Native Americans, two minority groups with a high concentration of social disadvantage and poor health outcomes, and offers comparisons between these minorities and the majority population of whites.
Methods
Data were obtained from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), an annual cross-sectional survey fielded by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. BRFSS uses random-digit-dial, disproportionate stratified sampling design and is administered over telephone to a representative sample of the U.S. population aged ≥18 years living in households.32 The coverage ranged from 87% to 98% across states and was lower in the South, for minorities, and for the poor, because of their lower telephone coverage. Details of the BRFSS survey methodology are published elsewhere33,34 (also www.cdc.gov/BRFSS/). BRFSS data collected between 2005 and 2013 were pooled together and analyzed in 2016.
Measures
Perceived racial discrimination and privilege in health care was measured by the question: Within the past 12 months when seeking health care, do you feel your experiences were worse than, the same as, or better than for people of other races? Worse was interpreted as perceived discrimination and better as perceived privilege. This question is part of the BRFSS optional module on race. Optional modules are selected by individual states each year. Between 2004 and 2013, the module on race was selected by 18 states, including Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, Washington, DC, and Wyoming.
Racial background was measured by the question: Which one or more of the following would you say is your race? Response options included White, Black or African American, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native (henceforth referred to as Native American), and some other group. The study focus was limited to mono-racial whites, blacks, and Native Americans. Hispanic ethnicity was assessed independently in a question that preceded the question measuring racial background. Respondents were asked: Are you Hispanic or Latino? Response options were yes and no. Following the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Hispanic ethnicity was treated as independent of race, meaning that members of any racial group could be Hispanic or non-Hispanic, and Hispanics could be members of any racial group.
The multidimensional concept of SES is typically measured by indicators such as income, education, and occupational position.35–37 These dimensions are inter-related, but each captures a different type of health-relevant resources.38 The variables included in the study were highest completed school grade (less than high school, high school graduate, some college, college graduate or higher); annual household income from all sources measured in eight categories and recoded into 2004 dollars using the midpoint of each category and the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index inflation rates; and health insurance coverage measured by the question: Do you have any kind of health care coverage, including health insurance, prepaid plans such as HMOs, or government plans such as Medicare? (yes/no). To capture foregone care because of cost, respondents were asked: Was there a time in the past 12 months when you needed to see a doctor but could not because of cost? (yes/no). Finally, employment status was a dichotomy distinguishing between current wage earners versus all others.
Gender, age, and the language of the interview (English versus other) as a proxy for language abilities are also among social determinants of health39,40 but in this study were treated as covariates because of scope limitations. Other covariates included availability of a personal doctor (Do you have one person you think of as your personal doctor or health care provider?), self-rated health (poor=1, fair=2, good=3, very good=4, excellent=5; treated as continuous), and year of the interview. U.S. Census Bureau region categories (South, Midwest, Northeast, and West) were included to examine geographic differences; categorization into individual states was not possible because of multicollinearity between state and year.
Statistical Analysis
Analyses were conducted using Stata, version 14. After calculating descriptive and bivariate statistics, multiple logistic regression models of perceived racial discrimination and privilege in health care were estimated. Independent variables included race, Hispanic ethnicity, income, education, health insurance, foregone care because of cost, earning a wage, gender, age, language of the interview, self-rated health, having a personal physician, region, and year. Curvilinear effects of income and age were examined. Models were estimated for the whole sample and separately for each racial group. Robust estimators to account for deviations from normality were used, and adjustment for design effects was performed using the “cluster” functionality in Stata.
Results
Based on bivariate tests shown in Table 1, perceived racial discrimination in health care was most common among blacks (12.3%), followed by Native Americans (10.7%) and whites (2.3%). By contrast, racial privilege was reported most commonly by whites (14.9%), followed by Native Americans (13.0%) and blacks (8.0%). Whites had highest annual household incomes compared with other racial groups (p-values <0.001) and highest proportion of college graduates (p-values <0.001). Native Americans were least likely to have a college degree, be employed, or have a personal physician (p-values <0.001) of all groups. Similarly to blacks, they lagged behind whites in health insurance coverage and self-rated health. They also more commonly reported forgoing care due to cost (p-values <0.001).
Table 1. Characteristics of the Sample by Racial Background.
White | Black | Native American | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N=90,477 (90.6%) | N=8,250 (8.3%) | N=1,093 (1.1%) | ||||
Characteristica | Percentage/Meanb | SD | Percentage/Meanb | SD | Percentage/Meanb | SD |
Perceived racial treatment in health care | ||||||
Discrimination | 2.3% | 12.3% | *** | 10.7% | *** | |
Privilege | 14.9% | 8.0% | *** | 13.0% | +++ * | |
Equal treatment | 82.7% | 79.7% | *** | 76.4% | *** ++ | |
Hispanic | 2.3% | 1.6% | *** | 12.3% | *** +++ | |
English interview | 99.5% | 99.7% | *** | 98.1% | *** +++ | |
Woman | 60.3% | 67.8% | *** | 58.0% | +++ | |
Income, $10,000s (0.5-11.41) | 5.66 | (3.27) | 3.74 | (2.78) *** | 3.77 | (2.89) *** |
Education | ||||||
Less than high school | 6.5% | 13.6% | *** | 17.2% | *** +++ | |
High school graduate | 31.4% | 34.1% | *** | 34.7% | ** | |
Some college | 27.7% | 28.2% | 31.5% | ** + | ||
College degree | 34.4% | 24.1% | *** | 16.6% | *** +++ | |
Employed for wage | 50.3% | 52.3% | *** | 45.0% | *** +++ | |
Has health insurance | 91.0% | 82.8% | *** | 81.2% | *** | |
Foregone medical care due to cost | 10.4% | 19.9% | *** | 19.7% | *** | |
Has personal physician | 89.2% | 84.1% | *** | 77.8% | *** +++ | |
Self-rated health (1-5) | 3.52 | (1.07) | 3.25 | (1.09) *** | 3.15 | (1.15)*** ++ |
Age, years (18-99) | 53.44 | (16.43) | 47.31 | (15.73)*** | 47.79 | (15.37) *** |
Region | ||||||
South | 20.9% | 49.7% | *** | 16.7% | *** +++ | |
West | 13.4% | 4.3% | *** | 33.2% | *** +++ | |
Midwest | 52.4% | 35.4% | *** | 39.4% | *** ++ | |
Northeast | 13.4% | 10.5% | *** | 10.8% | ** | |
Year | ||||||
2004 | 20.1% | 42.1% | *** | 23.3% | +++ ** | |
2005 | 8.8% | 16.4% | *** | 6.7% | +++ ** | |
2006 | 6.6% | 6.9% | 4.4% | +++ ** | ||
2007 | 2.9% | 1.1% | *** | 2.6% | +++ | |
2008 | 14.5% | 5.9% | *** | 8.5% | *** +++ | |
2009 | 16.3% | 8.5% | *** | 8.8% | *** | |
2010 | 12.6% | 13.6% | ** | 7.1% | *** +++ | |
2012 | 15.9% | 3.9% | *** | 31.1% | *** +++ | |
2013 | 2.3% | 1.6% | *** | 7.6% | *** +++ |
Notes: Boldface indicates statistical significance
p<0.05;
p<0.01;
p<0.001 two-tailed tests comparing blacks and Native Americans to whites on each variable;
p<0.05;
p<0.01;
p<0.001 two-tailed tests comparing blacks to Native Americans on each variable).
Ranges for continuous variables in parentheses.
Percentages are given for dichotomous variables; means are given for continuous variables, with SD in parentheses.
Income, annual household income from all sources.
Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2004-2013.
After adjusting for covariates, the results generally supported H1 (Table 2). Compared with whites, the relative risk of reporting discrimination versus equal treatment nearly quadrupled for blacks (relative risk ratio [RRR]=3.94, p<0.001), whereas their relative risk of reporting racial privilege decreased by 29% (RRR=0.71, p<0.001). For Native Americans, the relative risk of reporting racial discrimination more than tripled compared with whites (RRR=3.06, p<0.001). Interestingly, when compared with whites, Native Americans had a higher likelihood of reporting racial privilege versus equal treatment (RRR=1.32, p<0.01). Whites who reported Hispanic origin had a 50% higher relative risk of perceived discrimination compared with non-Hispanic whites (p<0.01).
Table 2. Multiple Logistic Regression Models Of Perceived Racial Discrimination/Privilege In Health Care For The Whole Sample And By Race.
Variable | Whole sample | White | Black | Native American | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RR R | 95% CI | RRR | 95% CI | RRR | 95% CI | RRR | 95% CI | |
Perceived discrimination | ||||||||
Racea | ||||||||
Black | 3.94 | (3.60, 4.30)*** | ||||||
Native American | 3.06 | (2.52, 3.72)*** | ||||||
Hispanic origin | 1.24 | (1.00, 1.53) | 1.50 | (1.18, 1.90)** | 0.53 | (0.27, 1.06) | 0.86 | (0.43, 1.71) |
English interview | 1.29 | (0.84, 1.97) | 1.53 | (0.97, 2.43) | 1.71 | (0.34, 8.59) | 1.00 | (0.19, 5.15) |
Woman | 0.82 | (0.77, 0.89)*** | 0.84 | (0.77, 0.91)*** | 0.74 | (0.65, 0.85)*** | 0.65 | (0.45, 0.95)* |
Income, $10,000s | 0.86 | (0.82, 0.90)*** | 0.84 | (0.79, 0.89)*** | 0.85 | (0.78, 0.94)** | 0.85 | (0.67, 1.07) |
Income squared | 1.01 | (1.003, 1.01)** | 1.01 | (1.004, 1.01)** | 1.01 | (1.005, 1.02)** | 1.01 | (0.99, 1.03) |
Educationb | ||||||||
Less than high school | 0.96 | (0.84, 1.11) | 1.26 | (1.06, 1.49)** | 0.68 | (0.54, 0.87)** | 0.60 | (0.30, 1.21) |
High school | 1.00 | (0.91, 1.11) | 1.20 | (1.06, 1.36)** | 0.78 | (0.64, 0.94)** | 0.54 | (0.30, 0.98)* |
Some college | 1.04 | (0.94, 1.15) | 1.16 | (1.02, 1.32)* | 0.86 | (0.71, 1.04) | 0.93 | (0.54, 1.60) |
Employed for wage | 0.64 | (0.59, 0.70)*** | 0.71 | (0.64, 0.78)*** | 0.53 | (0.45, 0.61)*** | 0.57 | (0.38, 0.86)** |
Health insurance | 0.75 | (0.68, 0.83)*** | 0.67 | (0.59, 0.76)*** | 0.96 | (0.80, 1.15) | 0.96 | (0.59, 1.54) |
Foregone care due to cost | 3.15 | (2.89, 3.42)*** | 3.86 | (3.48, 4.28)*** | 2.10 | (1.79, 2.46)*** | 2.28 | (1.51, 3.43)*** |
Has personal physician | 0.83 | (0.75, 0.91)*** | 0.80 | (0.71, 0.89)*** | 0.80 | (0.67, 0.96)* | 0.94 | (0.59, 1.48) |
Self-rated health | 0.77 | (0.74, 0.79)*** | 0.78 | (0.74, 0.81)*** | 0.78 | (0.72, 0.83)*** | 0.81 | (0.68, 0.97)* |
Age, years | 1.04 | (1.03, 1.06)*** | 1.04 | (1.03, 1.06)*** | 1.04 | (1.02, 1.07)** | 1.11 | (1.03, 1.20)** |
Age squared | 0.9995 | (0.9994, 0.9996)*** | 0.9995 | (0.9994, 0.9997)*** | 0.9995 | (0.9992,0.9997)*** | 0.9988 | (0.9980, 0.9996)** |
Regionc | ||||||||
West | 1.25 | (1.05, 1.48)* | 1.13 | (0.92, 1.38) | 1.35 | (0.97, 1.87) | 0.89 | (0.39, 2.06) |
Midwest | 1.07 | (0.94, 1.23) | 0.94 | (0.80, 1.11) | 1.32 | (1.02, 1.70)* | 1.05 | (0.49, 2.27) |
Northeast | 1.17 | (1.03, 1.34)* | 1.33 | (1.14, 1.55)*** | 0.86 | (0.65, 1.14) | 0.87 | (0.36, 2.10) |
Perceived privilege | ||||||||
Racea | ||||||||
Black | 0.71 | (0.65, 0.77)*** | ||||||
Native American | 1.32 | (1.11, 1.56)** | ||||||
Hispanic origin | 0.99 | (0.87, 1.13) | 0.98 | (0.85, 1.13) | 1.29 | (0.74, 2.23) | 1.21 | (0.71, 2.06) |
English interview | 0.51 | (0.39, 0.67)*** | 0.44 | (0.33, 0.59)*** | 1.95 | (0.41, 9.34) | 1.02 | (0.27, 3.86) |
Woman | 1.17 | (1.12, 1.21)*** | 1.21 | (1.16, 1.26)*** | 0.68 | (0.58, 0.80)*** | 0.89 | (0.63, 1.26) |
Income, $10,000s | 1.00 | (0.98, 1.03) | 1.03 | (1.00, 1.06)* | 0.85 | (0.77, 0.95)** | 1.07 | (0.86, 1.33) |
Income squared | 1.003 | (1.001, 1.01)** | 1.00 | (1.00, 1.004) | 1.01 | (1.00, 1.02) | 0.99 | (0.97, 1.01) |
Educationb | ||||||||
Less than high school | 0.58 | (0.53, 0.63)*** | 0.52 | (0.48, 0.57)*** | 1.65 | (1.26, 2.16)*** | 1.04 | (0.60, 1.79) |
High school | 0.50 | (0.48, 0.52)*** | 0.47 | (0.45, 0.50)*** | 1.19 | (0.96, 1.49) | 0.83 | (0.51, 1.35) |
Some college | 0.56 | (0.53, 0.58)*** | 0.55 | (0.52, 0.58)*** | 0.85 | (0.67, 1.08) | 0.60 | (0.36, 1.00)* |
Employed for wage | 0.43 | (0.41, 0.45)*** | 0.43 | (0.41, 0.45)*** | 0.53 | (0.44, 0.64)*** | 0.42 | (0.27, 0.64)*** |
Health insurance | 1.22 | (1.13, 1.32)*** | 1.28 | (1.17, 1.39)*** | 1.04 | (0.83, 1.32) | 1.07 | (0.68, 1.67) |
Foregone care due to cost | 1.01 | (0.94, 1.08) | 1.02 | (0.94, 1.09) | 1.01 | (0.81, 1.24) | 0.83 | (0.51, 1.33) |
Has personal physician | 1.21 | (1.14, 1.30)*** | 1.25 | (1.17, 1.34)*** | 1.11 | (0.88, 1.39) | 1.10 | (0.69, 1.75) |
Self-rated health | 1.04 | (1.02, 1.06)*** | 1.03 | (1.01, 1.05)** | 1.10 | (1.01, 1.19)* | 1.00 | (0.85, 1.17) |
Age, years | 0.97 | (0.96, 0.98)*** | 0.97 | (0.96, 0.97)*** | 1.00 | (0.98, 1.03) | 1.07 | (1.00, 1.14)* |
Age squared | 1.001 | (1.0004, 1.001)*** | 1.001 | (1.0004, 1.001)*** | 1.00 | (1.00, 1.0002) | 1.00 | (0.999, 1.000) |
Regionc | ||||||||
West | 1.29 | (1.19, 1.40) *** | 1.34 | (1.23, 1.46) *** | 0.69 | (0.45, 1.06) | 1.51 | (0.74, 3.06) |
Midwest | 1.20 | (1.12, 1.28)*** | 1.23 | (1.14, 1.32)*** | 0.87 | (0.63, 1.19) | 1.73 | (0.85, 3.50) |
Northeast | 1.30 | (1.22, 1.38)*** | 1.32 | (1.24, 1.41)*** | 1.05 | (0.79, 1.40) | 1.27 | (0.59, 2.71) |
Notes: Robust estimators and adjustment for clustering in survey design are used. All models control for year. Reference category:
White;
College graduate;
South. N=99,820 for the whole sample, 90,477 for whites, 8,250 for blacks, and 1,093 for Native Americans. Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2004-2013.
Boldface indicates statistical significance
p<0.05;
p<0.01;
p<0.001 two-tailed tests.
RRR, relative risk ratio
Consistent with H2(a), the risk of reporting racial discrimination versus equal treatment increased among less educated whites. Compared to college graduates, the relative risk of perceived discrimination increased by 26% for those with less than high school (p<0.01); by 20% for high-school graduates (p<0.01); and by 16% for those with some college (p<0.05); while the likelihood of reporting racial privilege decreased among whites with no college degree (less than high school, RRR=0.52; high school, RRR=0.47; some college, RRR=0.55; p-values <0.001). By contrast, lower education among blacks was associated with lower likelihood of reporting discrimination (less than high school, RRR=0.68; high school, RRR=0.78; p-values <0.01) and a higher likelihood of reporting racial privilege (less than high school, RRR=1.65, p<0.001). For Native Americans, lower education was linked to lower perceived racial privilege (some college, RRR=0.60, p<0.05) but also to lower discrimination (high school, RRR=0.54, p<0.05).
Income had a U-shaped relationship with perceived racial discrimination among whites and blacks; for Native Americans, a similar trend existed but coefficients were not significant owing to the smaller sample size. For whites, the likelihood of perceived discrimination fell with increasing income up to approximately $90,000 and plateaued afterward. For blacks, the nadir was reached at about $70,000. Thus, H2(b) arguing inverse relationship between income and perceived racial discrimination was supported for whites earning <$90,000 and blacks earning <$70,000. An increasing likelihood of reporting racial privilege at higher income levels was observed among whites (RRR=1.03, p<0.05), but blacks were less, not more, likely to report privilege with higher income (RRR=0.85, p<0.01). Consistent with H2(c), whites with health insurance reported discrimination less commonly than uninsured counterparts (RRR=0.67, p<0.001); they also more commonly reported privilege (RRR=1.28, p<0.001). Moreover, the risk of perceived discrimination more than doubled with foregoing care due to cost among blacks (RRR=2.10, p<0.001) and Native Americans (RRR=2.28, p<0.001); among whites, it nearly quadrupled (RRR=3.86, p<0.001), lending support for H2(d).
Perceptions of discrimination versus equal treatment were lower among wage earners (whites, RRR=0.71, p<0.001; blacks, RRR=0.53, p<0.001; Native Americans, RRR=0.57, p<0.01), individuals with a personal physician (whites, RRR=0.80, p<0.001; blacks, RRR=0.80, p<0.05), those with better self-rated health (whites and blacks, RRR=0.78, p<0.001; Native Americans, RRR=0.81, p<0.05), and women (whites, RRR=0.84, p<0.001; blacks, RRR=0.74, p<0.001; Native Americans, RRR=0.65, p<0.05). They were higher among white Northeasterners and black Midwesterners compared with their Southern counterparts (RRR=1.33, p<0.001 and RRR=1.32, p<0.05, respectively). They also increased with age up to 40–50 years, decreasing later.
By contrast, perceptions of racial privilege versus equal treatment were less common among wage earners (whites, RRR=0.43, p<0.001; blacks, RRR=0.53, p<0.001; Native Americans, RRR=0.42, p<0.001). For whites, these perceptions were more common among individuals with a personal physician (RRR=1.25, p<0.001) and better self-rated health (RRR=1.03, p<0.01), as well as among Westerners (RRR=1.34, p<0.001), Midwesterners (RRR=1.23, p<0.001), and Northeasterners (RRR=1.32; p<0.001) versus Southerners. For blacks, they increased with higher self-rated health (RRR=1.10, p<0.05). White women were more likely to report privilege than white men (RRR=1.21, p<0.001), whereas a reversed pattern was evident for Black women, who were less likely to report privilege than black men (RRR=0.68, p<0.001).
Discussion
This study makes several important contributions to the understanding of perceived racial discrimination and privilege among individuals who have recently sought health care. First, racial background clearly matters, with blacks and Native Americans more likely to perceive racial discrimination and less likely to perceive racial privilege even after adjusting for sociodemographic and health-related factors. These findings are congruous with prior research on racial disparities in patient experiences31 and on subtle biases among healthcare providers.41,42 Hispanic origin, however, is unrelated to perceived racial privilege and contributes to increased perceptions of discrimination among whites only. A potential explanation is that non-whites reporting Hispanic origin are commonly immigrants from the Caribbean and South America, who tend to have better health outcomes compared with their U.S.-born counterparts (e.g., Caribbean blacks are healthier than U.S.-born blacks).43
Second, socioeconomic disadvantages, including lack of health insurance, cost-related barriers to care, lower income, and lower education, are linked to increased perceptions of racial discrimination and decreased perceptions of racial privilege among whites. Among other racial groups, these relationships are more complicated. For blacks, low education contributes to lower perceived racial discrimination and higher perceived privilege. These results resonate with the literature suggesting that highly educated blacks may experience racism-related vigilance.44 Many college graduates, for instance, take college courses that discuss racial injustices in various spheres of life; in addition, highly educated black professionals often experience discrimination on the job, including receiving lower pay and being treated as “token minority.”45 These experiences may spill over and influence healthcare perceptions.
Interestingly, perceptions of racial privilege were unrelated to socioeconomic factors among Native Americans, and perceived racial discrimination in this population was linked to only a handful of hypothesized factors. The lower statistical power resulting from the relatively small number of Native Americans in the sample may have played a role, but the possibility remains that commonly examined socioeconomic indicators, such as income and education, are not as important in this population group. Eligibility for Indian Health Service46 may have contributed to increased perceptions of privilege among some Native Americans and to limited importance of conventional socioeconomic indicators in the area of health care.
At the same time, less often examined socioeconomic factors, namely cost-related barriers to care, emerged as critical for Native Americans as well as other racial groups. In fact, the statistical effects of foregone care due to cost were stronger than the effects of health insurance. This is noteworthy because cost barriers have rarely been investigated in relation to perceived racial treatment among healthcare users of different racial backgrounds. Even with health insurance, individuals who find the out-of-pocket costs of care prohibitive may be at risk of perceived unfair treatment and potentially of other negative outcomes yet to be examined. This finding is especially relevant in the current context, when insurance coverage is expanding after the Affordable Care Act but out-of-pocket costs are concurrently rising for many Americans.47,48
Limitations
It is important to note the limitations of this study. First, the measure of perceived discrimination and privilege in health care pertained to experiences during the past 12 months. The sample therefore excludes individuals who did not seek health care in the past year, including those who had no contact with the healthcare system because of access barriers. This likely contributed to the underrepresentation on non-whites in the sample. In general, BRFSS under-represents non-whites regardless of recent healthcare use.33,34 Mixed-race individuals (1.3% of the overall BRFSS sample), were not considered because their low numbers precluded meaningful statistical analysis. Future research with larger samples of these populations is warranted, as mixed-race groups have experienced unprecedented demographic growth in recent decades.
This study pooled several annual samples. To account for the possibility that samples varied, models controlled for the year. Because of the design of BRFSS, state was multicollinear with year and could not be included in models. To partially address this issue, adjustments were made for region, and supplementary analyses by region were conducted. Although these analyses revealed little regional variation in the relationships of social determinants with perceptions of racial treatment, it cannot be determined to what degree the study results apply to states not included in the sample. The pooling is an important strength of the study, as it yielded an adequately large analytic sample of Native Americans, a rarely studied population group. The pooling is only possible when the same measures are used across years. For instance, to measure perceived racial treatment in health care, BRFSS has used a single question with three response categories since 2004, even though more comprehensive, multi-item, psychometrically tested scales of perceived discrimination have become available in recent years.
Conclusions
This study suggests that although SES is an important social determinant of perceived racial treatment in health care, its role varies by indicator and racial group. Whites with low education or no health insurance, well-educated blacks, and individuals who face cost-related barriers to care are at increased risk of perceived discrimination. Importantly, policies and interventions to reduce these perceptions should primarily target structural and systemic factors, including society-wide inequalities in income, education, and healthcare access. Such policies and interventions must be tailored to the specific needs of each racial group, in consideration of their unique experiences in the healthcare system, and informed by scientific knowledge of the factors that shape these experiences, including the factors addressed by this study.
Footnotes
No financial disclosures were reported by the authors of this paper.
Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
References
- 1.Purnell JQ, Peppone LJ, Alcaraz K, et al. Perceived discrimination, psychological distress, and current smoking status: results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Reactions to Race module, 2004-2008. Am J Public Health. 2012;102(5):844–851. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300694. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Williams DR. Race, socioeconomic status, and health. The added effects of racism and discrimination. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999;896:173–188. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb08114.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb08114.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Gee GC, Ro A, Shariff-Marco S, Chae D. Racial Discrimination and Health Among Asian Americans: Evidence, Assessment, and Directions for Future Research. Epidemiol Rev. 2009;31(1):130–151. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxp009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxp009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Williams DR, Mohammed SA. Discrimination and racial disparities in health: evidence and needed research. J Behav Med. 2009;32(1):20–47. doi: 10.1007/s10865-008-9185-0. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10865-008-9185-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Brondolo E, Gallo LC, Myers HF. Race, racism and health: disparities, mechanisms, and interventions. J Behav Med. 2009;32(1):1–8. doi: 10.1007/s10865-008-9190-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10865-008-9190-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Pachter LM, Coll CG. Racism and child health: a review of the literature and future directions. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2009;30(3):255–263. doi: 10.1097/DBP.0b013e3181a7ed5a. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0b013e3181a7ed5a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Mustillo S, Krieger N, Gunderson EP, Sidney S, McCreath H, Kiefe CI. Self-reported experiences of racial discrimination and black-white differences in preterm and low-birthweight deliveries: the CARDIA Study. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(12):2125–2131. doi: 10.2105/ajph.94.12.2125. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.12.2125. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Gonzales KL, Harding AK, Lambert WE, Fu R, Henderson WG. Perceived experiences of discrimination in health care: a barrier for cancer screening among American Indian women with type 2 diabetes. Womens Health Issues. 2013;23(1):e61–67. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2012.10.004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2012.10.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Jacobs EA, Rathouz PJ, Karavolos K, et al. Perceived discrimination is associated with reduced breast and cervical cancer screening: the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN) J Womens Health. 2014;23(2):138–145. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2013.4328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2013.4328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Trivedi AN, Ayanian JZ. Perceived discrimination and use of preventive health services. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(6):553–558. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00413.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00413.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Van Houtven CH, Voils CI, Oddone EZ, et al. Perceived discrimination and reported delay of pharmacy prescriptions and medical tests. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(7):578–583. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0123.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-005-0104-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Burgess DJ, Ding YM, Hargreaves M, van Ryn M, Phelan S. The association between perceived discrimination and underutilization of needed medical and mental health care in a multi-ethnic community sample. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2008;19(3):894–911. doi: 10.1353/hpu.0.0063. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hpu.0.0063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Benkert R, Peters RM, Clark R, Keves-Foster K. Effects of perceived racism, cultural mistrust and trust in providers on satisfaction with care. J Natl Med Assoc. 2006;98(9):1532–1540. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Bird ST, Bogart LM, Delahanty DL. Health-related Correlates of Perceived Discrimination in HIV Care. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2004;18(1):19–26. doi: 10.1089/108729104322740884. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/108729104322740884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Haywood C, Jr, Diener-West M, Strouse J, et al. Perceived discrimination in health care is associated with a greater burden of pain in sickle cell disease. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2014;48(5):934–943. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.02.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.02.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Lowery BS, Knowles ED, Unzueta MM. Framing inequity safely: Whites' motivated perceptions of racial privilege. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007;33(9):1237–1250. doi: 10.1177/0146167207303016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167207303016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Fujishiro K. Is perceived racial privilege associated with health? Findings from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Soc Sci Med. 2009;68(5):840–844. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.12.007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.12.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Paradies Y. Defining, conceptualizing and characterizing racism in health research. Crit Public Health. 2006;(16):143–157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09581590600828881.
- 19.Shavers VL, Fagan P, Jones D, et al. The state of research on racial/ethnic discrimination in the receipt of health care. Am J Public Health. 2012;102(5):953–966. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300773. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300773. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Hausmann LR, Jeong K, Bost JE, Ibrahim SA. Perceived discrimination in health care and health status in a racially diverse sample. Med Care. 2008;46(9):905–914. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181792562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181792562. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Watson JM, Scarinci IC, Klesges RC, Slawson D, Beech BM. Race, socioeconomic status, and perceived discrimination among healthy women. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2002;11(5):441–451. doi: 10.1089/15246090260137617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/15246090260137617. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.D'Anna LH, Ponce NA, Siegel JM. Racial and ethnic health disparities: evidence of discrimination's effects across the SEP spectrum. Ethn Health. 2010;15(2):121–143. doi: 10.1080/13557850903490298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13557850903490298. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Hatzenbuehler ML, Phelan JC, Link BG. Stigma as a fundamental cause of population health inequalities. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(5):813–821. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.301069. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Link BG, Phelan J. Social Conditions as Fundamental Causes of Disease. J Health Soc Behav. 1995:80–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2626958. [PubMed]
- 25.Phelan JC, Link BG, Tehranifar P. Social conditions as fundamental causes of health inequalities: theory, evidence, and policy implications. J Health Soc Behav. 2010;51 Suppl:S28–40. doi: 10.1177/0022146510383498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022146510383498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Williams DR, Mohammed SA, Leavell J, Collins C. Race, socioeconomic status, and health: complexities, ongoing challenges, and research opportunities. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010;1186:69–101. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05339.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05339.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Farmer MM, Ferraro KF. Are racial disparities in health conditional on socioeconomic status? Soc Sci Med. 2005;60(1):191–204. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.04.026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.04.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Hayward MD, Crimmins EM, Miles TP, Yang Y. The significance of socioeconomic status in explaining the racial gap in chronic health conditions. Am Sociol Rev. 2000;65(6):910–930. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2657519. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Braveman P. Health inequalities by class and race in the U.S.: what can we learn from the patterns? Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(5):665–667. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.12.009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.12.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Braveman P. Social conditions, health equity, and human rights. Health Hum Rights. 2010;12(2):31–48. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Smedley BD, Stith AY, Nelson AR Institute of Medicine (U.S.) Unequal treatment: confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2003. Committee on Understanding and Eliminating Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data 2004-2013. U.S. DHHS; 2014. www.cdc.gov/brfss/ [Google Scholar]
- 33.Mokdad AH. The Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance System: past, present, and future. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:43–54. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.CDC. Methodologic changes in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 2011 and potential effects on prevalence estimates. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61(22):410–413. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Oakes JM, Rossi PH. The measurement of SES in health research: current practice and steps toward a new approach. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(4):769–784. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00073-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00073-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Galobardes B, Shaw M, Lawlor DA, Lynch JW, Davey Smith G. Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 1) J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60(1):7–12. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.023531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.023531. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Galobardes B, Shaw M, Lawlor DA, Lynch JW, Davey Smith G. Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 2) J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60(2):95–101. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.028092. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Braveman PA, Cubbin C, Egerter S, et al. Socioeconomic status in health research: one size does not fit all. JAMA. 2005;294(22):2879–2888. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.22.2879. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.294.22.2879. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Marmot M, Allen J, Bell R, et al. WHO European review of social determinants of health and the health divide. Lancet. 2012;380(9846):1011–1029. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61228-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61228-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Pottie K, Ng E, Spitzer D, Mohammed A, Glazier R. Language proficiency, gender and self-reported health: an analysis of the first two waves of the longitudinal survey of immigrants to Canada. Can J Public Health. 2008;99(6):505–510. doi: 10.1007/BF03403786. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Stepanikova I. Racial-ethnic biases, time pressure, and medical decisions. J Health Soc Behav. 2012;53(3):329–343. doi: 10.1177/0022146512445807. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022146512445807. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Green AR, Carney DR, Pallin DJ, et al. Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for black and white patients. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22(9):1231–1238. doi: 10.1007/s11606-007-0258-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0258-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Lucas JW, Barr-Anderson DJ, Kington RS. Health status, health insurance, and health care utilization patterns of immigrant Black men. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(10):1740–1747. doi: 10.2105/ajph.93.10.1740. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.10.1740. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Hicken MT, Lee H, Ailshire J, Burgard SA, Williams DR. “Every shut eye, ain't sleep”: The role of racism-related vigilance in racial/ethnic disparities in sleep difficulty. Race Soc Probl. 2013;5(2):100–112. doi: 10.1007/s12552-013-9095-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12552-013-9095-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Glenn EN. Race, Racialization, and Work. In: Edgell S, Gottfried H, Granter E, editors. The SAGE Handbook of the Sociology of Work and Employment. SAGE Publications; 2015. p. 93. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781473915206.n6. [Google Scholar]
- 46.Sequist TD, Cullen T, Acton KJ. Indian health service innovations have helped reduce health disparities affecting american Indian and alaska native people. Health Aff (Millwood) 2011;30(10):1965–1973. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0630. http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Paez KA, Zhao L, Hwang W. Rising out-of-pocket spending for chronic conditions: a ten-year trend. Health Aff (Millwood) 2009;28(1):15–25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.28.1.15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.28.1.15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Catlin MK, Poisal JA, Cowan CA. Out-of-pocket health care expenditures, by insurance status, 2007-10. Health Aff (Millwood) 2015;34(1):111–116. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]