Assessing the adequacy of self-reported alcohol abuse measurement across time and ethnicity: cross-cultural equivalence across Hispanics and Caucasians in 1992, non-equivalence in 2001–2002

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Do estimates of alcohol abuse reflect true levels across United States Hispanics and non-Hispanic Caucasians, or does culturally-based, systematic measurement error (i.e., measurement bias) affect estimates? Likewise, given that recent estimates suggest alcohol abuse has increased among US Hispanics, the field should also ask, "Does cross-ethnic change in alcohol abuse across time reflect true change or does measurement bias influence change estimates?"</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To address these questions, I used confirmatory factor analyses for ordered-categorical measures to probe for measurement bias on two large, standardized, nationally representative, US surveys of alcohol abuse conducted in 1992 and 2001–2002. In 2001–2002, analyses investigated whether 10 items operationalizing DSM-IV alcohol abuse provided equivalent measurement across Hispanic (<it>n </it>= 4,893) and non-Hispanic Caucasians (<it>n </it>= 16,480). In 1992, analyses examined whether a reduced 6 item item-set provided equivalent measurement among 834 Hispanic and 14,8335 non-Hispanic Caucasians.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In 1992, findings demonstrated statistically significant measurement bias for two items. However, sensitivity analyses showed that item-level bias did not appreciably bias item-set based alcohol abuse estimates among this cohort. For 2001–2002, results demonstrated statistically significant bias for seven items, suggesting caution regarding the cross-ethnic equivalence of alcohol abuse estimates among the current US Hispanic population. Sensitivity analyses indicated that item-level differences <it>did </it>erroneously impact alcohol abuse rates in 2001–2002, underestimating rates among Hispanics relative to Caucasians.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>1992's item-level findings suggest that estimates of drinking related social or legal problems may underestimate these specific problems among Hispanics. However, impact analyses indicated no appreciable effect on alcohol abuse estimates resulting from the item-set. Efforts to monitor change in alcohol abuse diagnoses among the Hispanic community can use 1992 estimates as a valid baseline. In 2001–2002, item-level measurement bias on seven items did affect item-set based estimates. Bias underestimated Hispanics' self-reported alcohol abuse levels relative to non-Hispanic Caucasians. Given the cross-ethnic equivalence of 1992 estimates, bias in 2001–2002 speciously minimizes current increases in drinking behavior evidenced among Hispanics. Findings call for increased public health efforts among the Hispanic community and underscore the necessity for cultural sensitivity when generalizing measures developed in the majority to minorities.</p

Racism as a determinant of health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite a growing body of epidemiological evidence in recent years documenting the health impacts of racism, the cumulative evidence base has yet to be synthesized in a comprehensive meta-analysis focused specifically on racism as a determinant of health. This meta-analysis reviewed the literature focusing on the relationship between reported racism and mental and physical health outcomes. Data from 293 studies reported in 333 articles published between 1983 and 2013, and conducted predominately in the U.S., were analysed using random effects models and mean weighted effect sizes. Racism was associated with poorer mental health (negative mental health: r = -.23, 95% CI [-.24,-.21], k = 227; positive mental health: r = -.13, 95% CI [-.16,-.10], k = 113), including depression, anxiety, psychological stress and various other outcomes. Racism was also associated with poorer general health (r = -.13 (95% CI [-.18,-.09], k = 30), and poorer physical health (r = -.09, 95% CI [-.12,-.06], k = 50). Moderation effects were found for some outcomes with regard to study and exposure characteristics. Effect sizes of racism on mental health were stronger in cross-sectional compared with longitudinal data and in non-representative samples compared with representative samples. Age, sex, birthplace and education level did not moderate the effects of racism on health. Ethnicity significantly moderated the effect of racism on negative mental health and physical health: the association between racism and negative mental health was significantly stronger for Asian American and Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants, and the association between racism and physical health was significantly stronger for Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants.<br /