Lying About Race

[gyngyn]

Here is a question that has always bugged me and I might post a separate thread for this question. How come Arabs are classified white in U.S census because they are "genetically caucasian" but hispanics have their own category? if anything, hispanics are more similar to your typical western Europe white than arabs.

We don't actually care about race or ethnicity as much as we care that you represent a group that is under-served in medicine.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Tintinnabula]

Here is a question that has always bugged me and I might post a separate thread for this question. How come Arabs are classified white in U.S census because they are "genetically caucasian" but hispanics have their own category? if anything, hispanics are more similar to your typical western Europe white than arabs.

Because the folks who write the US Census aren't really paying very good attention to issues of race enough to get the terms correct? I mean, technically "Caucasian" means from the region around the Caucasus mountains in the area of Azerbaijan and Georgia. [ETA: that's before we get to the fact that politics are at play also among the US Census workers, including the folks writing the stuff.] Gubmint werk!

 

[Dr. Stalker]

Defending OP here, I don't blame him for asking his first question or his follow up- he just wanted 100% clarity on this issue. Yes, it might be silly, but it is still a question, and he had the guts to ask it.

 

[Bottle]

We don't actually care about race or ethnicity as much as we care that you represent a group that is under-served in medicine.

Ok this sounds good, but it is avoiding the question. Why don't we get our own category so that med schools can determine if we are URM/ORM and if they need more of us? This whole URM thing is based on cultural ties. Arabs, and especially the muslims arabs will appreciate having a doctor that understand their thinking/ethics/traditions/etc.. .

Personally, I don't see that much of difference between hispanics and europeans. They mainly speak Spanish/portuguese, but so does whites (French vs English vs German). They follow the same religion, which helps tie their cultural ethics with whites.

I think what Arabs need to do is live in Chicago ghettos, shoot bunch of cops for ~20years and appear in good morning america to talk about their hardship to be finally considered for independent category.

 

[gyngyn]

Ok this sounds good, but it is avoiding the question. Why don't we get our own category so that med schools can determine if we are URM/ORM and if they need more of us? This whole URM thing is based on cultural ties. Arabs, and especially the muslims arabs will appreciate having a doctor that understand their thinking/ethics/traditions/etc.. .

Personally, I don't see that much of difference between hispanics and europeans. They mainly speak Spanish/portuguese, but so does whites (French vs English vs German). They follow the same religion, which helps tie their cultural ethics with whites.

I think what Arabs need to do is live in Chicago ghettos, shoot bunch of cops for ~20years and appear in good morning america to talk about their hardship to be finally considered for independent category.

You will be delighted to learn that best estimates indicate that Arab Americans are very well-represented in the US physician workforce.
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.imana.org/resource/resmgr/ispu_report_muslim_physician.pdf

 

[LizzyM]

Because the folks who write the US Census aren't really paying very good attention to issues of race enough to get the terms correct? I mean, technically "Caucasian" means from the region around the Caucasus mountains in the area of Azerbaijan and Georgia. [ETA: that's before we get to the fact that politics in the US Census workers, including the folks writing the stuff.] Gubmint werk!

This shows your ignorance of the US Census categories. The category is called "White" not "Caucasian". Obviously, there are a variety of skin colors within the category called "white" just as there is a variety within the category called, "Black/African-American".

Hispanics are under-represented in medicine (URM). Whites, including Arabs, are not URM.

 

[Tintinnabula]

This shows your ignorance of the US Census categories. The category is called "White" not "Caucasian".

Do you know if this is a mildly recent change? ETA: Oops, logic error. Assumes "Caucasian" was ever used, which I'm not sure of.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Do you know if this is a mildly recent change?

No.

The use of the term "white" on the US Census has existed since the late 1700s.

 

[Tintinnabula]

Yes, I realized in the middle of feeding the chicks just after that I'd made another logic error.

 

[LizzyM]

Do you know if this is a mildly recent change? ETA: Oops, logic error. Assumes "Caucasian" was ever used, which I'm not sure of.

The US Census has been using the term "white" since 1790.

 

[Tintinnabula]

With apologies to any government worker I may have slighted above, I also apologize to the thread for participating in a thread derail. Let's get back to why it's stupid to lie about race to AdComs.

 

[deleted535750]

We don't actually care about race or ethnicity as much as we care that you represent a group that is under-served in medicine.

I have to comment. If that was the case then wealthy African immigrants wouldn't get the URM bump. If that was the case there would be a URM bump for asians/whites who come from underrepresented groups in those categories. Affirmative Action is meant to help underserved groups. In actuality affirmative action across the board promotes "diversity" aka more blacks and latinos, no matter how privileged or poor their background may be.

 

[gyngyn]

I have to comment. If that was the case then wealthy African immigrants wouldn't get the URM bump. If that was the case there would be a URM bump for asians/whites who come from underrepresented groups in those categories. Affirmative Action is meant to help underserved groups. In actuality affirmative action across the board promotes "diversity" aka more blacks and latinos, no matter how privileged or poor their background may be.

We do give special consideration to representatives of under-served Asian groups (Cambodians,Hmong...).
You would be incorrect to assume that all individual representatives of under-served groups enjoy a detectable "boost".

 

[Bookworm36]

"handwaving about cultural and sociopolitical issues~ but at least they get black doctors!"

This is essentially what is going on when a racially black person, pacific islander, hispanic, etc is accepted into medical school with lower stats. And, there are communities where people won't go see a doctor if he or she is white, that is not refutable. What you are saying is race doesn't matter and everyone across the board should be held to the same standards?

Maybe you should check out the stats with race/MCAT scores/GPA because that is Not what is going on. Exemplifying that, this thread is about Lying about race, proving that it is not what is going on.

 

[ospmdriver]

I don't recall specifically, does AMCAS provide any guidance/instruction regarding an applicants "self-identified ethnicity and race"? Seems like a gray area for applicants that admissions committees must decipher as they see fit.

 

[LizzyM]

I don't recall specifically, does AMCAS provide any guidance/instruction regarding an applicants "self-identified ethnicity and race"? Seems like a gray area for applicants that admissions committees must decipher as they see fit.

That's why they call it "self-indentified". As an adult, you'll be asked to self identify every 10 years on the US census form.

 

[efle]

Interesting that "self-identify" is used when they're really interested in getting access to under-repped populations. It should read "what race would a patient who saw you think you were", no?

Edit: Should clarify I think both questions should come into consideration, as the former best predicts career in under served minority areas but the latter matters due to minority patients' same-race preference in physicians

 

[touchpause13]

Interesting that "self-identify" is used when they're really interested in getting access to under-repped populations. It should read "what race would a patient who saw you think you were", no?

Why on earth would you think that?

 

[efle]

Why on earth would you think that?

If the goal of producing URM docs is to provide people more likely to be sought out by URMs (eg above poster saying many minorities don't trust or go to white doctors) then what matters is how patients will perceive and identify you, not how you identify yourself.

 

[touchpause13]

If the goal of producing URM docs is to provide people more likely to be sought out by URMs (eg above poster saying many minorities don't trust or go to white doctors) then what matters is how patients will perceive and identify you, not how you identify yourself.

But you are still part of that culture even if you can pass for white. There is a long history of discounting the experiences of those who can pass, and it's really very disheartening to see people still buying into such beliefs.

 

[efle]

what matters is how patients will perceive and identify you, not how you identify yourself

But you are still part of that culture even if you can pass for white. There is a long history of discounting the experiences of those who can pass, and it's really very disheartening to see people still buying into such beliefs.

Oh please I'm not propagating the belittling of light skinned minority experiences. If I were as much of an dingus as Goro I'd take a jab at your reading comprehension right here

If a group of patients are using skin tone as a marker for which doctors they trust and will see, then you get skipped regardless of whether you identify with said group or not. You want to get those patients seeing more doctors, you'd have to go by who they'd identify.

 

[touchpause13]

Oh please I'm not propagating the belittling of light skinned minority experiences. If I were as much of an dingus as Goro I'd take a jab at your reading comprehension right here

If a group of patients are using skin tone as a marker for which doctors they trust and will see, then you get skipped regardless of whether you identify with said group or not.

Your logical mistake is assuming that minority patients are using skin tone to determine who they want to see.

 

[gyngyn]

Your logical mistake is assuming that minority patients are using skin tone to determine who they want to see.

Or who is available to see them!

 

[efle]

Your logical mistake is assuming that minority patients are using skin tone to determine who they want to see.

And what do you think is used instead? Do they visit light skinned doctors and ask them about their upbringing before deciding if they want medical services?

And I just want to add, I'm being devil's advocate and trying to poke at the connection between self-identifying in a race --> creating more access to patients desiring that race. Being a privileged ****lord I have zero experience in the realm of caring about or judging doctors race to begin with

Or who is available to see them!

And your thoughts? Iirc you're a Cali adcom with lots of insights on URM topics...does the physician's appearance as a URM member impact patient access or is one appearing non-minority but actually belonging to the minority culture just as likely to be sought out by minority members? Can this even be answered?

 

[gyngyn]

does the physician's appearance as a URM member impact patient access or is one appearing non-minority but actually belonging to the minority culture just as likely to be sought out by minority members? Can this even be answered?

The compelling reason for special consideration has little to do with the individual under consideration. Rather, the fact that members who identify with an under-represented group are more likely to serve that group. The fact that this service is generally well-received by that population is a bonus.

 

[Goro]

He is and he does. And you what? Pubmed is your friend. Pass this on to the entitled hyper-achievers who froth at the mouth when "URM" is mentioned.

Ethn Dis. 2009 Summer;19(3):345-51.
Patient-physician race concordance and its relationship to perceived health outcomes.
Kumar D1, Schlundt DG, Wallston KA.
Author information

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Race concordance occurs when the race of a patient matches the race of his/ her physician and discordance occurs when races do not match. Previous research has suggested an association between race concordance and measures of patient satisfaction and health outcome. In this study, we examined the relationship between race concordance and perceived quality of care, self-reported general health, and the SF-12 measures of physical and mental health in a community-based sample of 2001 adults.

DESIGN:
Telephone interviews were conducted with randomly selected households sampled from commercial lists of phone numbers.

ANALYSIS:
The association of concordance with the outcomes was analyzed separately for African American (n = 1,125) and White (n = 876) respondents using bivariate analysis and multiple linear regression.

RESULTS:
After controlling for age, sex, income, education, insurance status, and type of insurance, we found that race concordance was only associated with general health for White respondents (P < .006). Whites with insurance were more likely to be concordant than Whites without insurance and African Americans without insurance were more likely to be concordant than African Americans with insurance.

CONCLUSIONS:
Settings that employ a larger number of African American physicians in Nashville, Tennessee are places that people without insurance are more likely to seek health care. For health satisfaction and perceived health status, socioeconomic status and access to quality health care are likely more important than whether one's physician is of a similar or dissimilar race.


Health Aff (Millwood). 2000 Jul-Aug;19(4):76-83.
Do patients choose physicians of their own race?
Saha S1, Taggart SH, Komaromy M, Bindman AB.

Ethn Dis. 2004 Summer;14(3):360-71.
Racial disparities in coronary heart disease: a sociological view of the medical literature on physician bias.
Fincher C1, Williams JE, MacLean V, Allison JJ, Kiefe CI, Canto J.

J Health Soc Behav. 2002 Sep;43(3):296-306.
Is doctor-patient race concordance associated with greater satisfaction with care?
Laveist TA1, Nuru-Jeter A.

J Natl Med Assoc. 2002 Nov;94(11):937-43.
Race of physician and satisfaction with care among African-American patients.
LaVeist TA1, Carroll T.

And your thoughts? Iirc you're a Cali adcom with lots of insights on URM topics...does the physician's appearance as a URM member impact patient access or is one appearing non-minority but actually belonging to the minority culture just as likely to be sought out by minority members? Can this even be answered?

 

[efle]

The compelling reason for special consideration has little to do with the individual under consideration. Rather, the fact that members who identify with an under-represented group are more likely to serve that group. The fact that this service is generally well-received by that population is a bonus.

Ah, I thought I'd heard the argument put forth that we needed more, for example, AA doctors because often times AA patients will only trust/seek out those doctors, not only because AA doctors were more likely to practice in that area. If adding 100 white doctors to URM communities would end up increasing access to the patient population the same as 100 minority docs then I withdraw my challenge to the self-identify system

 

[efle]

He is and he does. And you what? Pubmed is your friend. Pass this on to the entitled hyper-achievers who froth at the mouth when "URM" is mentioned.

Ethn Dis. 2009 Summer;19(3):345-51.
Patient-physician race concordance and its relationship to perceived health outcomes.
Kumar D1, Schlundt DG, Wallston KA.
Author information

Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Race concordance occurs when the race of a patient matches the race of his/ her physician and discordance occurs when races do not match. Previous research has suggested an association between race concordance and measures of patient satisfaction and health outcome. In this study, we examined the relationship between race concordance and perceived quality of care, self-reported general health, and the SF-12 measures of physical and mental health in a community-based sample of 2001 adults.

DESIGN:
Telephone interviews were conducted with randomly selected households sampled from commercial lists of phone numbers.

ANALYSIS:
The association of concordance with the outcomes was analyzed separately for African American (n = 1,125) and White (n = 876) respondents using bivariate analysis and multiple linear regression.

RESULTS:
After controlling for age, sex, income, education, insurance status, and type of insurance, we found that race concordance was only associated with general health for White respondents (P < .006). Whites with insurance were more likely to be concordant than Whites without insurance and African Americans without insurance were more likely to be concordant than African Americans with insurance.

CONCLUSIONS:
Settings that employ a larger number of African American physicians in Nashville, Tennessee are places that people without insurance are more likely to seek health care. For health satisfaction and perceived health status, socioeconomic status and access to quality health care are likely more important than whether one's physician is of a similar or dissimilar race.


Health Aff (Millwood). 2000 Jul-Aug;19(4):76-83.
Do patients choose physicians of their own race?
Saha S1, Taggart SH, Komaromy M, Bindman AB.

Ethn Dis. 2004 Summer;14(3):360-71.
Racial disparities in coronary heart disease: a sociological view of the medical literature on physician bias.
Fincher C1, Williams JE, MacLean V, Allison JJ, Kiefe CI, Canto J.

J Health Soc Behav. 2002 Sep;43(3):296-306.
Is doctor-patient race concordance associated with greater satisfaction with care?
Laveist TA1, Nuru-Jeter A.

J Natl Med Assoc. 2002 Nov;94(11):937-43.
Race of physician and satisfaction with care among African-American patients.
LaVeist TA1, Carroll T.

And your thoughts? Iirc you're a Cali adcom with lots of insights on URM topics...does the physician's appearance as a URM member impact patient access or is one appearing non-minority but actually belonging to the minority culture just as likely to be sought out by minority members? Can this even be answered?

This seems to contradict what Gyngyn said and give evidence that one DOES want it to be minority docs in a minority area, not just docs. This also doesn't address touchpause's argument that you don't need to be visibly a minority member, only culturally, to have the increased access to minority patients.

Sometimes we idiot premeds can have slightly more nuanced discussions than "affirmative action bad, bitch moan whine".

 

[gyngyn]

Ah, I thought I'd heard the argument put forth that we needed more, for example, AA doctors because often times AA patients will only trust/seek out those doctors, not only because AA doctors were more likely to practice in that area. If adding 100 white doctors to URM communities would end up increasing access to the patient population the same as 100 minority docs then I withdraw my challenge to the self-identify system

The "yield" on UIM doctors though not 100%, is significantly better than the odds that a non-UIM will happily provide long term care for the people in these communities. As long as medicine is a service and not an entitlement for the providers, this must be taken into account.

 

[efle]

The "yield" on UIM doctors though not 100%, is significantly better than the odds that a non-UIM will happily provide long term care for the people in these communities. As long as medicine is a service an not an entitlement of the providers, this must be taken into account.

OK, so given the bold it makes sense for minority applicants to be desired because they'll more likely practice in that community.

However, from some of Goro's links (eg: we found that black and Hispanic Americans sought care from physicians of their own race because of personal preference and language, not solely because of geographic accessibility) it seems having more docs in the area/increased geographic access doesn't fully solve the problem - you also want docs which will satisfy the minority personal/language preference for their own race.

Which brings me back to my question, which I suspect can't be answered: does it matter if a doctor visibly appears to share race with the minority population, or only if they culturally do, in satisfying the same-race preference.

 

[gyngyn]

Which brings me back to my question, which I suspect can't be answered: does it matter if a doctor visibly appears to share race with the minority population, or only if they culturally do, in satisfying the same-race preference.

I can only tell you that my long view of this situation (>30 years) would indicate that the "apparent whiteness" of black and Mexican/American medical students had less to do with their commitment to service than their identification with those communities. The return on investment for students of color correlates more with their self-identification than their appearance.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

OK, so given the bold it makes sense for minority applicants to be desired because they'll more likely practice in that community.

However, from some of Goro's links (eg: we found that black and Hispanic Americans sought care from physicians of their own race because of personal preference and language, not solely because of geographic accessibility) it seems having more docs in the area/increased geographic access doesn't fully solve the problem - you also want docs which will satisfy the minority personal/language preference for their own race.

Which brings me back to my question, which I suspect can't be answered: does it matter if a doctor visibly appears to share race with the minority population, or only if they culturally do, in satisfying the same-race preference.

What's "visible" is a bit more nuanced than you think. I'm a light skinned Hispanic but I am often approached by darker skinned Hispanics who are seeking for a Spanish speaking individual to help them with directions or other stuff. Clearly, they're aware that someone with my skin color can identify with them.

 

[ospmdriver]

That's why they call it "self-indentified". As an adult, you'll be asked to self identify every 10 years on the US census form.

Since AMCAS does not provide any guidance, an applicant might make their selection based on whatever their parents tell them or other misinformation, or they might choose to check the US census website https://www.census.gov/population/race/about/faq.html which doesn't exactly make things crystal clear.

"An individual’s response to the race question is based upon self-identification. The Census Bureau does not tell individuals which boxes to mark or what heritage to write in."

"The racial categories included in the census questionnaire generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country, and not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically or genetically. People may choose to report more than one race to indicate their racial mixture, such as “American Indian” and “White.” People who identify their origin as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race. In addition, it is recognized that the categories of the race item include both racial and national origin or socio-cultural groups. You may choose more than one race category."

 

[efle]

I can only tell you that my long view of this situation (>30 years) would indicate that the "apparent whiteness" of black and Mexican/American medical students had less to do with their commitment to service than their identification with those communities. The return on investment for students of color correlates more with their self-identification than their appearance.

I very much understand you get more docs who will serve minority areas via self-identifying-as-minority applicants than applicant appearance.
I'm asking about the other side of the issue, whether it's self-identification or appearance that satisfies minority same-race preference.

Say you have Doctor A, who to use touchpause's phrase "passes"/appears white but identifies with the minority culture of an area.
Say you have Doctor B, who appears minority and also identifies with the minority culture of an area.
They both end up practicing in a minority area.

I get that they were equally likely to end up practicing in the minority area despite differing appearance.
I'm asking if Doc B does the better job of satisfying minority same-race preference that has been shown to exist via externally appearing to belong to the minority.

What's "visible" is a bit more nuanced than you think. I'm a light skinned Hispanic but I am often approached by darker skinned Hispanics who are seeking for a Spanish speaking individual to help them with directions or other stuff. Clearly, they're aware that someone with my skin color can identify with them.

Sure, not much in life is binary, but for sake of my increasingly misunderstood question you'd have to grant that Doc A and Doc B differ in the visibility of their cultural background.

 

[gyngyn]

I'm asking if Doc B does the better job of satisfying minority same-race preference that has been shown to exist via externally appearing to belong to the minority.

There's a PhD thesis in there somewhere...
At this point, just taking care of business (or trying to) will have to do.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I very much understand you get more docs who will serve minority areas via self-identifying-as-minority applicants than applicant appearance.
I'm asking about the other side of the issue, whether it's self-identification or appearance that satisfies minority same-race preference.

Say you have Doctor A, who to use touchpause's phrase "passes"/appears white but identifies with the minority culture of an area.
Say you have Doctor B, who appears minority and also identifies with the minority culture of an area.
They both end up practicing in a minority area.

I get that they were equally likely to end up practicing in the minority area despite differing appearance.
I'm asking if Doc B does the better job of satisfying minority same-race preference that has been shown to exist via externally appearing to belong to the minority.




Sure, not much in life is binary, but for sake of my increasingly misunderstood question you'd have to grant that Doc A and Doc B differ in the visibility of their cultural background.

Minorities are aware that certain members of their community can pass for white.

 

[gyngyn]

Minorities are aware that certain members of their community can pass for white.

And their credibility for commitment to service is at least as high in my experience as their more visible peers.

 

[ridethecliche]

Jesse Williams comes to mind.

 

[BamaNicole]

But you are still part of that culture even if you can pass for white. There is a long history of discounting the experiences of those who can pass, and it's really very disheartening to see people still buying into such beliefs.

This is a bit off topic but I can definitely vouch for what touchpause is saying. I'm half native american and half white. I have very light skin and I could pass for white. I used to get crap all the time from my sorority sisters because apparently if you're biracial to them its whatever you look like is what you are.

Its not okay to discount someone's racial identity and experience simply because you deem them to be a certain race based on their appearance. I'm native....nothing will ever change that but I'm getting tired of having to explain who I am simply because people think I'm white because I can pass for it.

The thing is....whether you "look" like a minority or not.....if you serve in that population and if you have an understanding of that population then people will understand that you are not what you appear.

if that makes any sense.

 

[efle]

Minorities are aware that certain members of their community can pass for white.

And their credibility for commitment to service is at least as high in my experience as their more visible peers.

This is a bit off topic but I can definitely vouch for what touchpause is saying. I'm half native american and half white. I have very light skin and I could pass for white. I used to get crap all the time from my sorority sisters because apparently if you're biracial to them its whatever you look like is what you are.

Its not okay to discount someone's racial identity and experience simply because you deem them to be a certain race based on their appearance. I'm native....nothing will ever change that but I'm getting tired of having to explain who I am simply because people think I'm white because I can pass for it.

The thing is....whether you "look" like a minority or not.....if you serve in that population and if you have an understanding of that population then people will understanding that you are not what you appear.

if that makes any sense.

My god guys, nothing contesting any of this was said by anyone at any point. I asked how much minority members who preferred same-race doctors used visible race cues - no freaking question of the validity of light skinned experiences, or whether light skinned necessarily means misidentified, or whether personal identity more strongly motivated minority service, etc (my very favorite goes to Goro's ironically condescending contribution showing what I was already arguing and gyngyn missing, that it's shared race not just increased presence of doctors that matters). This all reminds me of a class where we read Nozick's experience machine analogy and everyone kept arguing about the logistics of a machine that could simulate experience and how unrealistic it was...totally distracted by the surroundings and missed the question at the center of it.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

My god guys, nothing contesting any of this was said by anyone at any point. I asked how much minority members who preferred same-race doctors used visible race cues - no freaking question of the validity of light skinned experiences, or whether light skinned necessarily means misidentified, or whether personal identity more strongly motivated minority service, etc (my very favorite goes to Goro's ironically condescending contribution showing what I was already arguing and gyngyn missing, that it's shared race not just increased presence of doctors that matters). This all reminds me of a class where we read Nozick's experience machine analogy and everyone kept arguing about the logistics of a machine that could simulate experience and how unrealistic it was...totally distracted by the surroundings and missed the question at the center of it.

And I was trying to tell you that (at least from a Hispanic perspective), many who can pass for white give off enough "visible race cues" to their darker skinned peers. For example, if a "white looking" physician introduces herself as Dr. Sophia Rodriguez and is speaking Spanish, then she is "satisfying minority same-race preference that has been shown to exist via externally appearing to belong to the minority" as much as "Doctor B."

Or am I still missing your point?

 

[RedPhys]

And what do you think is used instead? Do they visit light skinned doctors and ask them about their upbringing before deciding if they want medical services?

At least here in Miami, in most cases, the name is a pretty big indicative. Something like Guillermo Torres will definitely sound more appealing than Carl Wilkins to the many old, Spanish-only speaking people.

Note: The names above were completely made up. Any relation to actual physicians with those names is nonexistant.

EDIT: Just saw @Cyberdyne 101 's post above. Glad to see we're on the same frequency.

 

[efle]

And I was trying to tell you that (at least from a Hispanic perspective), many who can pass for white give off enough "visible race cues" to their darker skinned peers. For example, if a "white looking" physician introduces herself as Dr. Sophia Rodriguez and is speaking Spanish, then she is "satisfying minority same-race preference that has been shown to exist via externally appearing to belong to the minority" as much as "Doctor B."

Or am I still missing your point?

Yes, you are. You can make the point that there are alternative and subtle cues - my original point was that patient perception of the docs race determines whether the doc satisfies their same-race preference, NOT the docs self-identified culture. I used "visibly" in several cases referring to skin but it also applies to any other external cues like name, hairstyle, whatever.

To recap:

I believe (and as Goro's post backs) that many minorities do not only need more doctors practicing in their area to increase access, but also same-race doctors.
I also believe that if the goal is to increase minority access, it therefor follows that you not only want applicants likely to serve in minority area, but also applicants likely to satisfy the same-race desire. Thus the question "what race would patients think you were" becomes important, not just "what race do you identify as".

 

[RedPhys]

To recap:

I believe (and as Goro's post backs) that many minorities do not only need more doctors practicing in their area to increase access, but also same-race doctors.
I also believe that if the goal is to increase minority access, it therefor follows that you not only want applicants likely to serve in minority area, but also applicants likely to satisfy the same-race desire. Thus the question "what race would patients think you were" becomes important, not just "what race do you identify as".

I think in the US, with the big issue of race, there is a misunderstanding when it comes to how other cultures perceive race. At least in my experience as a Hispanic, working with Hispanic populations in the US, the patients couldn't care less about the race of the doctor, and they'll be a whole lot more aware of other stuff like their name (probably indicating whether they are Hispanic or of Hispanic heritage) or whether they speak Spanish to directly communicate their concerns to the doctor.

 

[efle]

I think in the US, with the big issue of race, there is a misunderstanding when it comes to how other cultures perceive race. At least in my experience as a Hispanic, working with Hispanic populations in the US, the patients couldn't care less about the race of the doctor, and they'll be a whole lot more aware of other stuff like their name (probably indicating whether they are Hispanic or of Hispanic heritage) or whether they speak Spanish to directly communicate their concerns to the doctor.

There seems to be a lot of data against this saying Hispanics do have a personal preference for Hispanic doctors eg this and other of Goro's links

Edit: nvm I think I misunderstood and you are talking about the difference between race and ethnicity (eg don't care if doc is X race so long as they are Hispanic). At this point I totally back out of the discussion, because in the end it's all cultural constructs, aamc is vague, etc. Feel free to replace "race" with "ethnicity" in any of my prior posts, my point is still that it seems adcoms should care how applicants will be perceived by patients (via name or any other indicators) not just how applicants perceive themselves.

 

[Bookworm36]

Do patients choose physicians of their own race?

Without checking validity of the stats:
"we found that black and Hispanic Americans sought care from physicians of their own race because of personal preference and language, not solely because of geographic accessibility."

 

[efle]

Without checking validity of the stats:
"we found that black and Hispanic Americans sought care from physicians of their own race because of personal preference and language, not solely because of geographic accessibility."

...what? Why have you posted what you have posted?

 

[Bookworm36]

Is doctor-patient race concordance associated with greater satisfaction with care?

without checking validity: (I guess quotes are OK since this is a forum)
"Among each race/ethnic group, respondents who were race concordant reported greater satisfaction with their physician compared with respondents who were not race concordant. These findings suggest support for the continuation of efforts to increase the number of minority physicians, while placing greater emphasis on improving the ability of physicians to interact with patients who are not of their own race."

 

[Bookworm36]

...what? Why have you posted what you have posted?

It is from the abstract conclusion of the study. There is a free copy on Pubmed I didn't read.

Basically, I get the idea that Hispanic, african American, and those who identify with other groups prefer those physicians whom they identify. Ethnocentrism, but should be studied more. This powerpoint is very interesting about the care of one type of culture.
http://www.in.gov/isdh/files/Haiti_Cultural_and_Clinical_Care_Presentation_Read-Only.pdf

 

[efle]

without checking validity: (I guess quotes are OK since this is a forum)
"Among each race/ethnic group, respondents who were race concordant reported greater satisfaction with their physician compared with respondents who were not race concordant. These findings suggest support for the continuation of efforts to increase the number of minority physicians, while placing greater emphasis on improving the ability of physicians to interact with patients who are not of their own race."

...what is happening why are you doing this