Abstract
Importance Understanding the status of pelvic floor disorder (PFD) disparities research will allow the opportunity to advance future pelvic floor equity efforts. Objectives The aims of the study were to (1) characterize the landscape of PFD disparities literature using the 3 phases of disparities research framework, (2) describe the characteristics of PFD disparities studies, and (3) identify critical knowledge gaps. Study Design We performed a systematic review of peer-reviewed publications addressing disparities in PFDs among U.S. populations from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, or the Cochrane Database indexed between 1997 and 2022. Using the triphasic framework for advancing health disparities research by Kilbourne et al (Am J Public Health. 2006;96 (12):2113–21), we categorized the included studies into the detecting phase (identifies and measures disparities in historically marginalized populations), understanding phase (establishes disparity determinants), or reducing phase (conducts interventions to alleviate inequities). All screening, coding, and quality reviews were independently performed by at least 2 authors. We used descriptive analysis and the χ2 test for comparisons. Results The initial search identified 10,178 studies, of which 123 were included. Of the included studies, 98 (79.7%), 22 (17.9%), and 3 (2.4%) studies were detecting, understanding, and reducing phase research, respectively. The most common disparity category investigated was race and ethnicity (104 studies), and one third of these studies attributed drivers of racial and ethnic differences to structural influences. Publications of detecting phase studies outpaced the growth of understanding and reducing phase research. Conclusions Most PFD disparities research focused on identifying historically marginalized populations with inadequate progression to understanding and reducing phases. We recommend progressing PFD disparities research beyond the detecting phase to advance health equity in PFD care.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 758-764 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Urogynecology |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 1 2024 |
Funding
T.M. is supported by a research career development award (1K12TR004384: Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women\u2019s Health (BIRCWH) Program; Freund/Inker, MPI) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The remaining authors reported no relevant financial disclosures. Ten investigators on this study are members of the American Urogynecologic Society Health Disparities/Health Equity Special Interest Group. The investigative team consisted of 1 cis-gender man who identifies as Asian American, 6 individuals who identified as Black cis-gender women, and 4 individuals who identify as cis-gender White women. We acknowledge that our respective backgrounds and experience shaped the conceptualization and interpretation of this research. Please see Supplemental Content 1 http://links.lww.com/FPMRS/A464 for available authors\u2019 reflexivity statements.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Surgery
- Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Urology
