UNASSIGNED: Individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic backgrounds experience pernicious and pervasive health disparities that have emerged, in part, from clinician bias.
UNASSIGNED: We used a natural language processing approach to examine whether linguistic markers in electronic health record (EHR) notes differ based on the race and ethnicity of the patient. To validate this methodological approach, we also assessed the extent to which clinicians perceive linguistic markers to be indicative of bias.
UNASSIGNED: In this cross-sectional study, we extracted EHR notes for patients who were aged 18 years or older; had more than 5 years of diabetes diagnosis codes; and received care between 2006 and 2014 from family physicians, general internists, or endocrinologists practicing in an urban, academic network of clinics. The race and ethnicity of patients were defined as White non-Hispanic, Black non-Hispanic, or Hispanic or Latino. We hypothesized that Sentiment Analysis and Social Cognition Engine (SEANCE) components (ie, negative adjectives, positive adjectives, joy words, fear and disgust words, politics words, respect words, trust verbs, and well-being words) and mean word count would be indicators of bias if racial differences emerged. We performed linear mixed effects analyses to examine the relationship between the outcomes of interest (the SEANCE components and word count) and patient race and ethnicity, controlling for patient age. To validate this approach, we asked clinicians to indicate the extent to which they thought variation in the use of SEANCE language domains for different racial and ethnic groups was reflective of bias in EHR notes.
UNASSIGNED: We examined EHR notes (n=12,905) of Black non-Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, and Hispanic or Latino patients (n=1562), who were seen by 281 physicians. A total of 27 clinicians participated in the validation study. In terms of bias, participants rated negative adjectives as 8.63 (SD 2.06), fear and disgust words as 8.11 (SD 2.15), and positive adjectives as 7.93 (SD 2.46) on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being extremely indicative of bias. Notes for Black non-Hispanic patients contained significantly more negative adjectives (coefficient 0.07, SE 0.02) and significantly more fear and disgust words (coefficient 0.007, SE 0.002) than those for White non-Hispanic patients. The notes for Hispanic or Latino patients included significantly fewer positive adjectives (coefficient -0.02, SE 0.007), trust verbs (coefficient -0.009, SE 0.004), and joy words (coefficient -0.03, SE 0.01) than those for White non-Hispanic patients.
UNASSIGNED: This approach may enable physicians and researchers to identify and mitigate bias in medical interactions, with the goal of reducing health disparities stemming from bias.

Approximately 11% of people with kidney failure worldwide are treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD). This study examined PD use and practice patterns across the globe.
A cross-sectional survey.
Stakeholders including clinicians, policy makers, and patient representatives in 182 countries convened by the International Society of Nephrology between July and September 2018.
PD use, availability, accessibility, affordability, delivery, and reporting of quality outcome measures.
Descriptive statistics.
Responses were received from 88% (n=160) of countries and there were 313 participants (257 nephrologists [82%], 22 non-nephrologist physicians [7%], 6 other health professionals [2%], 17 administrators/policy makers/civil servants [5%], and 11 others [4%]). 85% (n=156) of countries responded to questions about PD. Median PD use was 38.1 per million population. PD was not available in 30 of the 156 (19%) countries responding to PD-related questions, particularly in countries in Africa (20/41) and low-income countries (15/22). In 69% of countries, PD was the initial dialysis modality for≤10% of patients with newly diagnosed kidney failure. Patients receiving PD were expected to pay 1% to 25% of treatment costs, and higher (>75%) copayments (out-of-pocket expenses incurred by patients) were more common in South Asia and low-income countries. Average exchange volumes were adequate (defined as 3-4 exchanges per day or the equivalent for automated PD) in 72% of countries. PD quality outcome monitoring and reporting were variable. Most countries did not measure patient-reported PD outcomes.
Low responses from policy makers; limited ability to provide more in-depth explanations underpinning outcomes from each country due to lack of granular data; lack of objective data.
Large inter- and intraregional disparities exist in PD availability, accessibility, affordability, delivery, and reporting of quality outcome measures around the world, with the greatest gaps observed in Africa and South Asia.

Hemodialysis (HD) is the most common form of kidney replacement therapy. This study aimed to examine the use, availability, accessibility, affordability, and quality of HD care worldwide.
A cross-sectional survey.
Stakeholders (clinicians, policy makers, and consumer representatives) in 182 countries were convened by the International Society of Nephrology from July to September 2018.
Use, availability, accessibility, affordability, and quality of HD care.
Descriptive statistics.
Overall, representatives from 160 (88%) countries participated. Median country-specific use of maintenance HD was 298.4 (IQR, 80.5-599.4) per million population (pmp). Global median HD use among incident patients with kidney failure was 98.0 (IQR, 81.5-140.8) pmp and median number of HD centers was 4.5 (IQR, 1.2-9.9) pmp. Adequate HD services (3-4 hours 3 times weekly) were generally available in 27% of low-income countries. Home HD was generally available in 36% of high-income countries. 32% of countries performed monitoring of patient-reported outcomes; 61%, monitoring of small-solute clearance; 60%, monitoring of bone mineral markers; 51%, monitoring of technique survival; and 60%, monitoring of patient survival. At initiation of maintenance dialysis, only 5% of countries used an arteriovenous access in almost all patients. Vascular access education was suboptimal, funding for vascular access procedures was not uniform, and copayments were greater in countries with lower levels of income. Patients in 23% of the low-income countries had to pay >75% of HD costs compared with patients in only 4% of high-income countries.
A cross-sectional survey with possibility of response bias, social desirability bias, and limited data collection preventing in-depth analysis.
In summary, findings reveal substantial variations in global HD use, availability, accessibility, quality, and affordability worldwide, with the lowest use evident in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

Using a retrospective cohort study design, we report empirical evidence on the effect of parental socioeconomic status, primary care, and health care expenditure associated with preterm or low-birth-weight (PLBW) babies on their mortality (neonatal, postneonatal, and under-5 mortality) under a universal health care system. A total of 4668 singleton PLBW babies born in Taiwan between January 1 and December 31, 2001, are extracted from a population-based medical claims database for a follow-up of up to 5 years. Multivariate survival models suggest the positive effect of higher parental income is significant in neonatal period but diminishes in later stages. Consistent inverse relationship is observed between adequate antenatal care and the three outcomes: neonatal hazard ratio (HR) = 0.494, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.312 to 0.783; postneonatal HR = 0.282, 95% CI = 0.102 to 0.774; and under-5 HR = 0.575, 95% CI = 0.386 to 0.857. Primary care services uptake should be actively promoted, particularly in lower income groups, to prevent premature PLBW mortality.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to primary care among people with chronic conditions.
METHODS: Data for this study were taken from the household component of the 2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. The analysis primarily focused on adults ≥ 18 years old. Logistic regressions were conducted among people with chronic conditions to compare primary care attributes between each minority group and their non-Hispanic white counterparts and between individuals with high, above average, or below average socioeconomic status and their low socioeconomic status counterparts, controlling for other individual factors.
RESULTS: Racial disparities were found in having usual source of care (USC), USC provider type, and USC location. However, no disparities were found in ease of contacting or getting to USC as well as the services received. Furthermore, very limited socioeconomic disparities were found after controlling for other individual characteristics, in particular race and insurance status.
CONCLUSIONS: More efforts need to be devoted to racial/ethnic minorities with chronic conditions to improve their access to continuous and high-quality primary care.