↓ Skip to main content

Racism and health service utilisation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
13 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
447 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Racism and health service utilisation: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0189900
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although racism has been posited as driver of racial/ethnic inequities in healthcare, the relationship between racism and health service use and experience has yet to be systematically reviewed or meta-analysed. This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative empirical studies that report associations between self-reported racism and various measures of healthcare service utilisation. Data were reviewed and extracted from 83 papers reporting 70 studies. Studies included 250,850 participants and were conducted predominately in the U.S. The meta-analysis included 59 papers reporting 52 studies, which were analysed using random effects models and mean weighted effect sizes. Racism was associated with more negative patient experiences of health services (HSU-E) (OR = 0.351 (95% CI [0.236,0.521], k = 19), including lower levels of healthcare-related trust, satisfaction, and communication. Racism was not associated with health service use (HSU-U) as an outcome group, and was not associated with most individual HSU-U outcomes, including having had examinations, health service visits and admissions to health professionals and services. Racism was associated with health service use outcomes such as delaying/not getting healthcare, and lack of adherence to treatment uptake, although these effects may be influenced by a small sample of studies, and publication bias, respectively. Limitations to the literature reviewed in terms of study designs, sampling methods and measurements are discussed along with suggested future directions in the field.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 447 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 447 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 10%
Student > Master 45 10%
Researcher 40 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 38 9%
Student > Bachelor 33 7%
Other 69 15%
Unknown 176 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 55 12%
Social Sciences 55 12%
Psychology 34 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 1%
Other 34 8%
Unknown 201 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2025.
All research outputs
#1,738,059
of 32,300,445 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#19,661
of 216,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,955
of 478,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#345
of 3,475 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,300,445 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 478,104 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,475 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.