IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i14p8865-d868217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examine Race/Ethnicity Disparities in Perception, Intention, and Screening of Dementia in a Community Setting: Scoping Review

Author

Listed:
  • SangA Lee

    (Nursing Department, Robert and Donna Manning College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125, USA)

  • Deogwoon Kim

    (Nursing Department, Robert and Donna Manning College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125, USA)

  • Haeok Lee

    (Nursing Department, Robert and Donna Manning College of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125, USA)

Abstract

Background: Delayed detection and diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease and related dementia (ADRD) can lead to suboptimal care and socioeconomic burdens on individuals, families, and communities. Our objective is to investigate dementia screening behavior focusing on minority older populations and assess whether there are ethnic differences in ADRD screening behavior. Methods: The scoping review method was utilized to examine ADRD screening behavior and contributing factors for missed and delayed screening/diagnosis focusing on race/ethnicity. Results: 2288 papers were identified, of which 21 met the inclusion criteria. We identified six dimensions of ADRD screening behavior: Noticing Symptoms, Recognizing a problem, Accepting Screen, Intending Screen, Action, and Integrating with time. Final findings were organized into study race/ethnicity, theoretical background, the methods of quantitative and qualitative studies, description and measures of ADRD screening behavior, and racial/ethnic differences in ADRD screening behavior. Conclusions: A trend in ethnic disparities in screening for ADRD was observed. Our findings point to the fact that there is a scarcity of studies focusing on describing ethnic-specific ADRD screening behavior as well as a lack of those examining the impact of ethnicity on ADRD screening behavior, especially studies where Asian Americans are almost invisible.

Suggested Citation

  • SangA Lee & Deogwoon Kim & Haeok Lee, 2022. "Examine Race/Ethnicity Disparities in Perception, Intention, and Screening of Dementia in a Community Setting: Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8865-:d:868217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8865/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8865/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angel, J.L. & Angel, R.J., 2006. "Minority group status and healthful aging: Social structure still matters," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(7), pages 1152-1159.
    2. Marcella Alsan & Marianne Wanamaker, 2018. "Tuskegee and the Health of Black Men," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(1), pages 407-455.
    3. Marcella Alsan & Owen Garrick & Grant Graziani, 2019. "Does Diversity Matter for Health? Experimental Evidence from Oakland," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(12), pages 4071-4111, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Currie, Janet & Kurdyak, Paul & Zhang, Jonathan, 2024. "Socioeconomic status and access to mental health care: The case of psychiatric medications for children in Ontario Canada," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Isaac Mbiti & Danila Serra, 2022. "Health workers’ behavior, patient reporting and reputational concerns: lab-in-the-field experimental evidence from Kenya," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 514-556, April.
    3. Andreas Ferrara & Price Fishback, 2024. "Discrimination, Migration, and Economic Outcomes: Evidence from World War I," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(5), pages 1201-1219, September.
    4. Andreas Ferrara & Price Fishback, 2024. "Discrimination, Migration, and Economic Outcomes: Evidence from World War I," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(5), pages 1201-1219, September.
    5. Kairiza, Terrence & Kembo, George & Chigusiwa, Lloyd, 2023. "Herding behavior in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in rural Zimbabwe: The moderating role of health information under heterogeneous household risk perceptions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 323(C).
    6. Xiaolong Hou & Yang Jiao & Leilei Shen & Zhuo Chen, 2024. "The lasting impact of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study: COVID-19 vaccination hesitation among African Americans," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(2), pages 1-33, June.
    7. Clemens, Jeffrey & Hoxie, Philip & Kearns, John & Veuger, Stan, 2023. "How did federal aid to states and localities affect testing and vaccine delivery?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    8. Kristensen, Frederikke Frehr & Sharp, Paul, 2021. "Disease Surveillance, Mortality and Race: The Case of HIV/AIDS in the United States," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 553, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. Diana Moreira & Santiago Pérez, 2022. "Who Benefits from Meritocracy?," NBER Working Papers 30113, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Nathan Nunn, 2020. "History as Evolution," NBER Working Papers 27706, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Marie, Olivier & Zwiers, Esmée, 2022. "Religious Barriers to Birth Control Access," CEPR Discussion Papers 17427, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Markus Eyting, 2022. "Why do we Discriminate? The Role of Motivated Reasoning," Working Papers 2208, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    13. Yana Gallen & Melanie Wasserman, 2021. "Informed Choices: Gender Gaps in Career Advice," Working Papers 2021-025, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    14. Balat, Jorge & Papageorge, Nicholas W. & Qayyum, Shaiza, 2017. "Positively Aware? Conflicting Expert Reviews and Demand for Medical Treatment," IZA Discussion Papers 10919, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Kurt Schmidheiny & Sebastian Siegloch, 2023. "On event studies and distributed‐lags in two‐way fixed effects models: Identification, equivalence, and generalization," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(5), pages 695-713, August.
    16. Weber, Michael & D'Acunto, Francesco & Fuster, Andreas, 2021. "Diverse Policy Committees Can Reach Underrepresented Groups," CEPR Discussion Papers 16563, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Carla Brailey & Brittany C. Slatton, 2024. "Centering Black Women’s Voices: Illuminating Systemic Racism in Maternal Healthcare Experiences," Societies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-12, May.
    18. Bohdana Kurylo, 2021. "The Impact of Same-Race Teachers on Student Behavioral Outcomes," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp695, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    19. Matthias Flückiger & Markus Ludwig & Ali Sina Önder, 2019. "Ebola and State Legitimacy," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(621), pages 2064-2089.
    20. Sievertsen, Hans Henrik & Smith, Sarah, 2024. "Do Female Experts Face an Authority Gap? Evidence from Economics," IZA Discussion Papers 17029, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8865-:d:868217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.