A Scoping Review of Health Research with Racially/Ethnically Minoritized Adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

Living with intersectional identities, having a disability, and being a member of a racial or ethnic minoritized group in the U.S., contributes to marginalization that may result in health disparities and health inequities. The purpose of this scoping review is to describe health research regarding adult racial/ethnic minoritized individuals in the U.S with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD). Eight electronic databases were searched to identify literature on the topic published since 2000. Of the 5,229 records, 35 articles were included in the review. Eligible studies included research conducted in the U.S., published in English, and research focused on adults with I/DD with race and/or ethnicity information. The 35 articles included racial/ethnic minoritized individuals who were Black, Latinx/Hispanic, American Indian, and Asian. Twenty-nine of the 35 articles identified health disparities experienced by adults with I/DD from racial/ethnic minoritized groups. Many health disparities were demonstrated in the articles, where adult racial/ethnic minoritized individuals with I/DD fared worse compared to White adults with I/DD. Additionally, four articles describe differences in health experiences by those from racial or ethnic minoritized backgrounds. Results of this scoping review highlight the need for research that incorporates intentional inclusion of racial/ethnic minoritized people with I/DD and include novel methodologies that allow for the contributions of historically marginalized voices. Future research with an intersectionality approach is recommended to promote equity.

Providing Equitable Access to Health Care for Individuals with Disabilities: An Important Challenge for Medical Education.

In a recent national survey, over 50% of physicians reported not feeling confident in their ability to provide care to individuals with disabilities. This finding is troubling as physicians are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) to ensure their practice is accessible to individuals with disabilities. This commentary addresses the need for including disability in medical education and to provide inclusive and quality care for individuals with disabilities. We offer four recommendations to enhance medical school curricula that would educate medical students to provide equitable health services to individuals with disabilities: 1) embed disability training throughout medical education; 2) educate medical students to recognize multiple models of disability; 3) include education and experience with universal design and supported decision-making; and 4) include individuals with all types of disabilities in medical education. Including disability education for medical students should better prepare future physicians for feeling confident in their ability to provide care to individuals with disabilities.

A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Pap Testing in Women with Disabilities and Serious Mental Illnesses: Thirty Years After the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Background: Thirty years after the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed, promising equal access to health services for people with disabilities and serious mental illness, research on Pap testing continues to uncover health disparities among women with disabilities and women with serious mental illnesses, including those that identify as an ethnic/racial minority. Aim: The purpose of this paper is to describe and present the literature on the barriers and facilitators women with disabilities and women with serious mental illnesses face with receiving a Pap test using the social ecological model. We also examined the degree to which racial/ethnic minority women were included in these articles. Method: A scoping review was conducted where the research team searched United States academic literature from 1990 through February 2020 in PubMed, Medline, and CINAHL using general subject headings for disability, mental illness, and Pap testing. Results: Thirty-two articles met inclusion criteria. More barriers than facilitators were mentioned in articles. Barriers and facilitators are organized into three groups according to social ecological model and include individual (e.g., socioeconomic status, anxiety, education), interpersonal (e.g., family, living environment), and organizational factors (health care provider training, health care system). Participant's race/ethnicity were often reported but minoritized populations were often not the focus of articles. Conclusions: More articles discussed the difficulties that women with disabilities and women with serious mental illnesses face with receiving a Pap test than facilitators to Pap testing. Additional research should focus on the intersectionality race/ethnicity and women with disabilities and women with serious mental illnesses in relation to Pap testing.