A call to leverage a health equity lens to accelerate human neuroscience research

Abstract

Investigation of health inequities tend to be examined, in human neurosciences, as biological factors at the level of the individual. In actuality, health inequities arise, due largely in part, to deep-seated structural factors. Structural inequality refers to the systemic disadvantage of one social group compared to others with whom they coexist. The term encompasses policy, law, governance, and culture and relates to race, ethnicity, gender or gender identity, class, sexual orientation, and other domains. These structural inequalities include but are not limited to social segregation, the intergenerational effects of colonialism and the consequent distribution of power and privilege. Principles to address inequities influenced by structural factors are increasingly prevalent in a subfield of the neurosciences, i.e., cultural neurosciences. Cultural neuroscience articulates the bidirectional relationship between biology and environmental contextual factors surrounding research participants. However, the operationalization of these principles may not have the intended spillover effect on the majority of human neurosciences: this limitation is the overarching focus of the present piece. Here, we provide our perspective that these principles are missing and very much needed in all human neuroscience subdisciplines to accelerate our understanding of the human brain. Furthermore, we provide an outline of two key tenets of a health equity lens necessary for achieving research equity in human neurosciences: the social determinants of health (SDoH) framework and how to deal with confounders using counterfactual thinking. We argue that these tenets should be prioritized across future human neuroscience research more generally, and doing so is a pathway to further gain an understanding of contextual background intertwined with the human brain, thus improving the rigor and inclusivity of human neuroscience research.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.