Differences in health outcomes across racial groups are among the most commonly reported findings in health disparities research. Often, these studies do not explicitly connect observed disparities to mechanisms of systemic racism that drive adverse health outcomes among racialized and other marginalized groups in the United States. Without this connection, investigators inadvertently support harmful narratives of biologic essentialism or cultural inferiority that pathologize racial identities and inhibit health equity. This paper outlines pitfalls in the conceptualization, contextualization, and operationalization of race in quantitative population health research and provides recommendations on how to appropriately engage in scientific inquiry aimed at understanding racial health inequities. Race should not be used as a measure of biologic difference, but rather as a proxy for exposure to systemic racism. Future studies should go beyond this proxy use and directly measure racism and its health impacts.

As the long-standing and ubiquitous racial inequities of the United States reached national attention, the public health community has witnessed the rise of "health equity tourism". This phenomenon is the process of previously unengaged investigators pivoting into health equity research without developing the necessary scientific expertise for high-quality work. In this essay, we define the phenomenon and provide an explanation of the antecedent conditions that facilitated its development. We also describe the consequences of health equity tourism -namely, recapitulating systems of inequity within the academy and the dilution of a landscape carefully curated by scholars who have demonstrated sustained commitments to equity research as a primary scientific discipline and praxis. Lastly, we provide a set of principles that can guide novice equity researchers to becoming community members rather than mere tourists of health equity.

BACKGROUND: Despite substantial research on medical student mistreatment, there is scant quantitative data on microaggressions in US medical education. OBJECTIVE: To assess US medical students' experiences of microaggressions and how these experiences influenced students' mental health and medical school satisfaction. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a crosssectional, online survey of US medical students' experiences of microaggressions. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was a positive depression screen on the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Medical school satisfaction was a secondary outcome. We used logistic regression to model the association between respondents' reported microaggression frequency and the likelihood of a positive PHQ-2 screen. For secondary outcomes, we used the chi-squared statistic to test associations between microaggression exposure and medical school satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: Out of 759 respondents, 61% experienced at least one microaggression weekly. Gender (64.4%), race/ethnicity (60.5%), and age (40.9%) were the most commonly cited reasons for experiencing microaggressions. Increased microaggression frequency was associated with a positive depression screen in a dose-response relationship, with second, third, and fourth (highest) quartiles of microaggression frequency having odds ratios of 2.71 (95% CI: 1-7.9), 3.87 (95% CI: 1. , relative to the first quartile. Medical students who experienced at least one microaggression weekly were more likely to consider medical school transfer (14.5% vs 4.7%, p<0.001) and withdrawal (18.2% vs 5.7%, p<0.001) and more likely to believe microaggressions were a normal part of medical school culture (62.3% vs 32.1%) compared to students who experienced microaggressions less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the largest study on the experiences and influences of microaggressions among a national sample of US medical students. Our major findings were that microaggressions are frequent occurrences and that the experience of microaggressions was associated with a positive depression screening and decreased medical school satisfaction.

IntroductionViolent encounters with police represent a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the USA, especially among Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC). This study characterises trends in fatal police shootings overall and by armed status and quantifies inequities in mortality burden and years of life lost (YLL) across racial/ethnic groups.MethodsLongitudinal study of Washington Post data on fatal police shootings in the USA using generalised linear-mixed models to capture trends with time and relative rates.ResultsThis study shows that the rate of fatal police shootings for Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) is constant from 2015 to 2020. Further, BIPOC have significantly higher death rates compared with Whites in the overall victim pool (Native American RR=3.06, Black RR=2.62, Hispanic RR=1.29) and among unarmed victims (Black RR=3.18, Hispanic RR=1.45). Native American (RR=3.95), Black (overall RR=3.29, unarmed RR=3.49) and Hispanic (RR=1.55, unarmed RR=1.55), victims had similarly high rates of YLL relative to Whites.ConclusionFatal police shootings are a public health emergency that contribute to poor health for BIPOC. Urgent attention from health professionals is needed to help drive policy efforts that reduce this unjust burden and move us towards achieving health equity in the US.