{snip}

Do No Harm, a nonprofit organization focused on opposing ideological influence in medicine, released a report Tuesday disputing a recent study by economists Michael Frakes and Jonathan Gruber that suggests increasing the share of Black physicians in military medical facilities leads to better outcomes for Black patients.

The Do No Harm study takes issue with the findings by alleging several flaws, including that Frakes and Gruber’s “The Effect of Provider Diversity on Racial Health Disparities: Evidence from the Military” measures changes in health outcomes when patients are transferred to bases with different proportions of Black doctors, but argues it never directly measures whether Black patients treated by Black doctors fare better than those treated by non-Black doctors.

The report stresses that the authors’ design looks at facility-level shares of Black physicians rather than one-to-one patient-doctor racial matching.

In a press release, Do No Harm summarizes their critique into three core problems with the study: it never actually tests whether Black patients fare better when treated by Black doctors, it downplays findings showing Black patients achieve their best outcomes when treated by non-Black doctors at facilities with more Black physicians, and it relies on speculative explanations for those results while failing to rule out non-racial factors that could account for the outcomes.

{snip}

The Do No Harm critique concludes that, on the basis of the evidence presented by Frakes and Gruber, there is not a scientifically supported case for using racial concordance as a rationale for maintaining racial preferences in medical education and hiring.

{snip}

The post Medical Watchdog Challenges Key Study Used to Justify DEI Health Policies: ‘Scientifically Unsound’ appeared first on American Renaissance.