TY - JOUR
T1 - Why are Black individuals disproportionately burdened with uterine fibroids and how are we examining this disparity? A systematic review
AU - Charifson, Mia A.
AU - Vieira, Dorice
AU - Shaw, Jacquelyn
AU - Kehoe, Siobhan
AU - Quinn, Gwendolyn P.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by a grant (20-A0-00-1005789) from the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program . Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American Society for Reproductive Medicine
PY - 2022/10
Y1 - 2022/10
N2 - Objective: To systematically review and summarize the literaure on nongenetic risk factors that may contribute to the racial disparity in uterine fibroids (UF) that disproportionality impacts Black individuals at 2-3 times the rate of White individuals and how the racial disparity has been studied to date. Evidence Review: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol checklist guided the systematic review process. From January 1 to June 1, 2021, relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Multiple investigators screened, assessed, extracted, and critically appraised the data. Results: A total of 44 articles examined the relationship among UFs, race/ethnicity, and nongenetic risk factors, including cardiometabolic features, comorbidities, diet, chemical exposures, vitamin D levels, reproductive characteristics and socioeconomic factors, and life experiences. Most studies reported on the same 3 cohort study populations, and there was inconsistent statistical reporting of the race/ethnicity, risk factors, and UF relationship. Conclusion: Many potential risk factors related to the racial disparity in UF have been studied thus far. There is still little conclusive evidence regarding which risk factors are the greatest contributors to racial disparities in UF. Promising areas of research deserve greater attention and a greater diversity of study populations and analytical methods.
AB - Objective: To systematically review and summarize the literaure on nongenetic risk factors that may contribute to the racial disparity in uterine fibroids (UF) that disproportionality impacts Black individuals at 2-3 times the rate of White individuals and how the racial disparity has been studied to date. Evidence Review: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol checklist guided the systematic review process. From January 1 to June 1, 2021, relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Multiple investigators screened, assessed, extracted, and critically appraised the data. Results: A total of 44 articles examined the relationship among UFs, race/ethnicity, and nongenetic risk factors, including cardiometabolic features, comorbidities, diet, chemical exposures, vitamin D levels, reproductive characteristics and socioeconomic factors, and life experiences. Most studies reported on the same 3 cohort study populations, and there was inconsistent statistical reporting of the race/ethnicity, risk factors, and UF relationship. Conclusion: Many potential risk factors related to the racial disparity in UF have been studied thus far. There is still little conclusive evidence regarding which risk factors are the greatest contributors to racial disparities in UF. Promising areas of research deserve greater attention and a greater diversity of study populations and analytical methods.
KW - health disparity
KW - leiomyoma
KW - race/ethnicity
KW - racial disparity
KW - Uterine fibroids
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85139058840&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85139058840&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.xfnr.2022.07.004
DO - 10.1016/j.xfnr.2022.07.004
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85139058840
SN - 2666-5719
VL - 3
SP - 256
EP - 279
JO - F and S Reviews
JF - F and S Reviews
IS - 4
ER -