Did institutional racism contribute to adverse COVID-19 clinical outcomes in ethnic minority healthcare staff? Systematic review ================================================================================================================================ * Oluwatomisin Adewole * Kismet Lalli * Holly Peters * Chris Price * Blanche Lumb * Micaela Gal * Alison Cooper ## Abstract **Introduction** Of the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) healthcare workers who died during the first wave of the pandemic, 63% belonged to an ethnic minority background, despite making up 21% of the NHS workforce. Previous research has considered biological and social causes such as obesity or overcrowded housing. This review aims to explore whether elements of institutional racism contributed to ethnic disparities in adverse COVID-19 clinical outcomes among healthcare staff. **Method** Eleven databases were searched including MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Eight healthcare organisations within the grey literature were also searched. A narrative synthesis was conducted. **Results** 20 studies were included for review. There were ethnic disparities in the rate of COVID-19 infection, mortality and wellbeing. Three elements of institutional racism were identified associated with these adverse outcomes, namely, overrepresentation of ethnic minority staff in frontline roles, discriminatory redeployment and harassment and bullying. **Conclusion** The pandemic exacerbated pre-existing racial inequalities within the UK healthcare workforce. Further research is required to clarify the definition of institutional racism and increase understanding of how this manifests in a healthcare setting and can be mitigated. **Funding statement** The Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre was funded for this work by Health and Care Research Wales on behalf of Welsh Government. ## Introduction Healthcare workers in the UK were seven times more likely to be exposed to the Sars-Cov-2 virus and develop COVID-19 compared with the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic (1). However, staff who identify as ethnic minority faced even greater adverse clinical outcomes due to events occurring in the first-wave of the pandemic (2). The first 11 National Health Service (NHS) doctors to die due to contracting the virus were of an ethnic minority background (3). By April 2020, 95% of all NHS doctors who died were minority ethnic (3). Furthermore, 63% of all NHS healthcare workers who died were Black, Asian or minority ethnic despite making up just 21% of the NHS workforce (3). Ethnic minority individuals were also more likely to be admitted into Intensive Care Units (ICU) and require invasive ventilation compared to their white counterparts (4). Proposed biological causes of these disparities include higher genetic susceptibility to the coronavirus and the presence of pre-existing conditions (5). Other research places greater focus on socio-economic factors such as low-income employment, residing in over-crowded areas where the virus is more prevalent and transmissible, as well as culturally-influenced health-seeking behaviours (6). When these social and biological factors are accounted for in research, a disparity in outcomes still remains between ethnic groups, suggesting that there is another cause that is not being addressed (7). One cause to consider is that of institutional racism. The British Medical Journal (BMJ) defines institutional racism as ‘the processes of racism that are embedded in laws (local, state, and federal), policies, and practices of society and its institutions that provide advantages to ethnic groups deemed as superior, while differentially oppressing, disadvantaging, or otherwise neglecting ethnic groups viewed as inferior’(2). Elements that comprise this term are outlined in Figure 1. This term is not clearly defined in research and other used definitions such as Macpherson’s(8), are less applicable to a healthcare context. ![Figure 1-](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1-](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/F1) Figure 1- Elements of institutional racism (adapted by author) 159×68mm (150 x 150 DPI) The aim was to explore whether racism persisting at an institutional level within the UK healthcare system contributed to the racial disparities in COVID-19 adverse clinical outcomes among NHS healthcare staff. Our objectives included: * Identifying and describing the adverse clinical outcomes experienced by ethnic minority healthcare staff compared with white healthcare staff during the COVID-19 pandemic; Identifying factors that contributed to the differences in adverse clinical outcomes; Exploring how elements of institutional racism might contribute to these differences ## Method We conducted this review in September 2021 accordance with the Cochrane Handbook of Reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (9). We registered the protocol with International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO)(10). We were supported by representatives from Health Education Improvement Wales (HEIW) and the General Medical Council (GMC) as stakeholders who had an interest in this area. They supported the review throughout: clarifying terminology, protocol planning, review progress meetings and dissemination of findings. ### Search strategy We developed a search strategy, developed by stakeholders (CP, BL, KL, RJ) and two information scientists (EG, DM). Key search terms were divided into five concepts based on the research question: “COVID clinical outcomes”, “ethnic minority”, “healthcare staff/employees” and “institutional racism”. ### Sources of data We searched eleven databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsychINFO, SCOPUS and Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-Based Practice database (JBI EBP), L*OVECovid, VA- ESP*, Cochrane COVID review bank and Collabovid. The searches occurred between 11th – 30th January 2022. We also searched the grey literature between 30th January – 5th February 2022. Eight healthcare organisations were searched for grey literature material (Figure 2). ![Figure 2-](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/F2.medium.gif) [Figure 2-](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/F2) Figure 2- PRISMA Flowchart 259×149mm (220 x 220 DPI) The eligibility criteria are outlined in Table 1. Clinical outcomes outlined in Table 1 were derived from current research in the general population and are not specific to healthcare staff and employees. Therefore, studies that assessed other adverse outcomes, for example wellbeing, were included. View this table: [Table 1-](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T1) Table 1- Eligibility Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies 159×81mm (220 x 220 DPI) ### Study Selection The studies identified, were independently screened by a single reviewer (OA) against the eligibility criteria. Studies were screened by title and abstract, followed by full text screening. 20% of the studies were double coded by a second reviewer (KL) to check the consistency in interpretation of the eligibility criteria. Any uncertainty was discussed among the research team. ### Data Extraction Data were extracted from each eligible study by an independent reviewer (OA) using a data extraction form and presented in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The data extraction table of all eligible studies is provided in the supplementary material. Data were extracted based on their sample characteristics, study design and the outcome measured (11). ### Critical Appraisal We critically appraised each study according to their design (12). Four studies were appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) opinion and commentary checklists (13). Four studies used the JBI prevalence checklists (14). One study was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) qualitative checklist(15). Six studies were appraised using the Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE) cross-sectional checklist and five were appraised using the SURE cohort study checklist(16, 17). ## Results A total of 1520 studies was identified from electronic databases, and 1446 studies were screened by title and abstract following deduplication (Figure 2). 1386 studies were excluded by the reviewer (OA) as they were non-UK based, irrelevant to the PECO and beyond the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. 3225 items were identified from grey literature, press articles and blogs were excluded, 16 reports were assessed against the eligibility criteria and two reports were included. 20 studies remained for analysis, 18 sourced from electronic databases and two from the grey literature. Most of the studies were observational in design (n = 11). This included six cross-sectional and five cohort studies. Four of the included papers were opinion pieces, whilst four others were surveys. One study was qualitative. Eighteen studies measured a COVID-19 clinical outcome among healthcare staff. Six of these also assessed for an element of institutional racism. Two opinion pieces discussed elements of institutional racism but no clinical outcome. The included studies were mapped according to adverse COVID-19 clinical outcomes and the elements of institutional racism (Figure 3). This map, which is initialled according to study design, highlights many evidence gaps. Several studies assessed for more than one element of institutional racism or clinical outcome. ![Figure 3-](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3-](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/F3) Figure 3- Evidence map of the included studies, mapped according to study design 398×378mm (87 x 87 DPI) ### Strength of Evidence Most studies were of moderate-to-low quality due to poor justification of their methods and discussion of results. Many of the studies did not adjust for confounders when calculating the risk of COVID-19 infection, nor did they address the likelihood of information bias among participants. There was a consistent lack of explanation regarding sample size or recruitment methods in the observational studies. Four studies were of high quality; two cross-sectional, one cohort and one qualitative study (18–21). These studies obtained large datasets, provided thorough explanations of methodology and acknowledged sources of bias. The qualitative study provided a variety of rich, in-depth experiences of ethnic minority staff during the pandemic and a thorough thematic analysis. Critical appraisal of each study is provided in the supplementary material. #### Ethnic disparities in adverse COVID-19 clinical outcomes When socio-economic and demographic factors were adjusted for, an ethnic disparity among staff still remained (20, 23, 25). Other factors that may have contributed to ethnic disparities included genetic predisposition and inhabiting socially deprived regions (20, 24, 25). ##### SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 infection Of 10 studies that measured the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among ethnically diverse healthcare staff, nine found disparities in the prevalence, rate and risk between ethnic groups (18, 20–28). Eight studies, which measured the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence (detection of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody which indicates a positive infection) within the healthcare population, found that this was greater among ethnic minority than white healthcare workers (18, 20–24, 26, 27). One paper, which measured the seropositivity (presence of a positive SARS-CoV-2 antibody test) among healthcare staff, found no difference between ethnicities (28). ##### Hospitalisation and ICU admission This outcome was measured in one paper, which found no difference in hospitalisation and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rates between ethnic groups of healthcare workers (22). ##### Mortality One cohort study examined the risk of COVID-related death among an ethnically diverse cohort of consultants, which found that the risk of death was greater among ethnic minority groups (29). When comparing white physicians with Asian, Black and Mixed physicians, the risk of mortality for ethnic minority women over 60 and men over 50, was two-fold. This level of risk increased five-fold in ethnic minority men over 60 (Hazard Ratio: 5.46, 5.50, 5.65 vs HR: 3.82) (29). ##### Mental and physical wellbeing Six articles identified ethnic disparities in wellbeing, including clinical safety during the pandemic (19, 30–34). Ethnic minority staff were more likely to receive inadequate PPE-training whilst working on COVID wards and have reduced access to PPE equipment (30, 31). Ethnic minority nurses had concerns about inadequately designed masks, which they felt did not consider cultural or physiological differences between ethnic groups (33). #### Potential elements of institutional racism None of the studies used the term ‘institutional racism’. Discrimination and racism were alluded to by authors but un-defined (25, 27, 28). The elements of institutional racism identified in this review were derived from the BMJ definition(2). ##### Overrepresentation in frontline roles and lack of job security *‘Minority ethnic groups are systemically over-represented at lower level of NHS grade hierarchy, working in the shadow of snowy white peaks’(35)* There is evidence of ethnic disparities in healthcare professions across six papers. Ethnic minority staff are more likely to work in junior roles, occupy lower pay bands and are underrepresented in senior, managerial clinical and non-clinical positions (20, 31–33, 35, 36). Two papers suggested that the pandemic exacerbated concerns over career progression among ethnic minority healthcare staff and increased the lack in promotion opportunities (19, 32). In a survey, members of staff reported feeling as though they were excluded from senior-level discussions concerning their safety whilst working during the pandemic and that they were appointed ‘riskier responsibilities’ in comparison with their white colleagues such as having to see patients without PPE (31). Ethnic minority healthcare staff are more likely to undergo frequent employment changes due to overrepresentation in temporary roles (31, 35, 36). Ethnic minority staff were less likely to receive in-person training than their white colleagues whilst working in COVID wards (31). Ethnic minority staff, particularly within the nursing profession, expressed feeling a lack of job security (19, 31, 33). An article reported that ethnic minority nurses felt as though they had a lack of agency or power when speaking to their line managers and senior staff (33). ##### Discriminatory redeployment and higher risk of exposure *‘I was told to see a COVID patient without extra PPE…when I expressed my concerns, I was dismissed and told I had no right to refuse to see any patient…I felt so undervalued and worthless’*(*37*) Redeployment is the process of reassigning staff and employees to a new role or work location to meet new demands (38). Five studies found that ethnic minority healthcare workers were more likely to be redeployed to COVID wards than their white colleagues and were at greater risk of exposure to the virus (30, 31, 33–35). Both ethnic minority senior and junior healthcare workers were four times more likely to be redeployed to patient facing roles than their white colleagues (31). Ethnic minority staff believed themselves to be at greater risk of mortality because of ‘racially motivated’ redeployment methods (30, 33). ##### Harassment and bullying *‘There were…people who…chose to not follow guidance and they wanted to see patients face to face…because they were worried about their position in the team and about bullying’*(*19*) A finding across five studies was an inability for ethnic minority staff to raise concerns regarding their clinical safety due to fear of how it may impact their job (19, 30, 31, 33, 34). Some felt that there was a ‘culture of appeasement’ that was prohibiting raising concerns of welfare (31). Staff described a ‘disregard’ and lack of understanding regarding the experiences of ethnic minority employees in the workplace, causing a barrier in conversation with their white managers (19). In a survey around wellbeing of healthcare staff during the pandemic, 32% of ethnic minority healthcare workers felt overlooked and were treated without dignity or respect. 39% of respondents felt unsupported by their white seniors (34). They spoke of the ‘pressure’ applied to those working from home “because [they] were not trusted to be doing what [they] should be doing” by white managers (19). Ethnic minority staff were reluctant to work from home due to fear of perceived special treatment and how this might impact interprofessional relationships at work (19). ## Discussion ### Main findings Among 20 UK-based studies, ethnic disparities were found in the acquisition of COVID-19 infection, clinical wellbeing and mortality rates. Potential evidence of institutional racism included: overrepresentation of ethnic minority staff in frontline roles, discriminatory redeployment, and harassment and bullying, which may have contributed to these ethnic disparities in outcomes. ### Strengths and Limitations This is the first systematic review to assess the impact of institutional racism impacting UK ethnic minority healthcare staff during the pandemic. We searched 11 databases and extensively in the grey literature. Selecting exclusively UK-based studies increases the transferability of the findings to the NHS. Stakeholder involvement helped to focus the review and interpret findings. Most evidence was of moderate-to-low quality. The data extraction and critical appraisal processes were not checked by a second reviewer due to time constraints, this could have introduced information bias. Additionally, interpretations of elements of institutional racism may have been subjective. However, this was mitigated through discussion of uncertainties within the research team and stakeholders. Another limitation was a lack of consistency regarding ethnic categories, where attention to specific sub-groups varied between studies. ### Comparison with literature Before the pandemic, ethnic minorities were disproportionately represented in high-risk, low-paying jobs within the NHS (39–41). This was exacerbated during the pandemic, which saw an uptake of at- risk healthcare roles by predominantly ethnic minority staff (42). These roles are less-valued within the healthcare system and have been associated with job insecurity, poorer health and a greater risk of exposure (42, 43). Wider evidence suggests that this overrepresentation may be due to underemployment of ethnic minority staff in senior positions (44). White staff are more likely to be appointed into senior roles from shortlisting compared with ethnic minority staff (45). Additionally, ethnic minority staff constitute 10% of NHS trust boards despite making up over 19.7% of the workforce (45, 46). This excludes them from employment decisions, hinders career progression and provides unequal opportunities to staff. A consistent finding identified within this review was a lack of agency and job insecurity felt among NHS staff. Literature attributes this to multiple factors, including the feeling of inferiority to white colleagues, which is perpetuated by the presence of pay-gaps and ongoing workplace racism. As a result, staff members have reported feeling unable to raise concerns with their seniors regarding their wellbeing, for fear of how this will impact their job. Ethnic minority staff are 1.5 times more likely than their white colleagues to enter the formal disciplinary process due to referral by a senior member of staff (47, 48). This creates a workplace culture of fear and appeasement, in which staff feel compelled to dismiss safety concerns to avoid being perceived as a ‘troublemaker’ (49). Pope et al. referred to this culture as a form of ‘organizational silence’ designed to prohibit ethnic minority staff from voicing out (49). This review highlighted the exacerbation of harassment and bullying towards ethnic minority healthcare staff during the pandemic. The results align with a pre-pandemic picture of harassment and bullying in the NHS. Staff from ethnic minority groups have consistently been subjected to higher levels of bullying, harassment and abuse from their colleagues, compared with white staff(45). Despite the actions of organisations such as the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES), harassment and bullying towards ethnic minority staff is still increasing. In 2021, the NHS staff survey revealed that the rate of bullying and harassment of ethnic minority staff had increased from 14.5% in 2019 to 17% (50). However, as the NHS is an employer organisation, their surveys may be subject to reporting bias, as ethnic minority staff may feel uncomfortable disclosing their personal experiences (51). Furthermore, bullying and harassment appears to be most prevalent in nursing, where 1 in 5 nurses are of an ethnic minority background (52). This may be due to a greater exposure to vertical harassment and bullying, from staff in senior positions, as well as horizontal harassment and bullying, from staff within the same level (53). The consequences of harassment and bullying include a deterioration in mental wellbeing and poorer health outcomes as a result of chronic stress (51, 54, 55). It is apparent that the fear of being stereotyped or disrespected by their colleagues deprives ethnic minority staff of an environment where they feel able to voice concerns about their safety. Prejudice was not explicitly stated in any of the studies, nor has it been sufficiently defined in wider literature. However, we identified an association between discrimination and the review findings. Several of the studies allude to the redeployment process as a form of discrimination against ethnic minority healthcare staff (31, 33, 35, 37). The BMJ states that discrimination results in ‘inequitable access to opportunities and resources’(2), this review identified two studies in which there was a clear disparity in PPE and training opportunities between white and ethnic minority healthcare staff (31, 37). Similarly, the lack of ethnic minority representation in senior NHS positions presents as ‘disadvantaging or otherwise neglecting’ (2) these groups as they are excluded from decisions involving their employment and safety (19, 31, 32). ## Conclusion The pandemic highlighted pre-existing racial inequalities present within the UK healthcare workforce. These inequalities need to be addressed by governing bodies and healthcare organisations, with interventions robustly evaluated. Further research is required to clarify the definition of Institutional racism and increase understanding about how this manifests in a healthcare setting and can be mitigated. ## Data Availability All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors ## Competing Interests There are no competing interests among the authors and contributors of this review. ## Ethical Approval None Required ## Search plan strategy **Research project title:** Did institutional racism contribute to adverse COVID-19 clinical outcomes in ethnic minority healthcare staff and employees? A Systematic Review **Databases searched:** MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsychINFO, SCOPUS, JBI EBP, L*OVECovid, VA-ESP*, Cochrane COVID review bank and Collabovid **Key concepts and search terms:** ![Table2](http://medrxiv.org/http://medrxiv.stage.highwire.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T2.medium.gif) [Table2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T2) ## Supplementary material: Data Extraction tables (**1–3**) ![Table3](http://medrxiv.org/) [Table3](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T3) ## Supplementary Material: Critical Appraisal Tables (**1–12**) ![Table4](http://medrxiv.org/) [Table4](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T4) ![Table5](http://medrxiv.org/) [Table5](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T5) ![Table6](http://medrxiv.org/) [Table6](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T6) ![Table7](http://medrxiv.org/) [Table7](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T7) ![Table8](http://medrxiv.org/) [Table8](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/13/2024.06.11.24308764/T8) ## Acknowledgements The authors of this review would like to thank Professor Adrian Edwards, Rhian Jones and Katie Laugharne for their support and feedback. * Received June 11, 2024. * Revision received June 11, 2024. * Accepted June 13, 2024. * © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/) ## References 1. 1.Nguyen LH, Drew DA, Graham MS, Joshi AD, Guo C-G, Ma W, et al. Risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study. The Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(9):e475–e83. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30164-X [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30164-X&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=32745512&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 2. 2.Razai MS, Kankam HKN, Majeed A, Esmail A, Williams DR. Mitigating ethnic disparities in covid-19 and beyond. BMJ. 2021;372:m4921. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m4921 [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE4OiIzNzIvamFuMTNfMTcvbTQ5MjEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNi8xMy8yMDI0LjA2LjExLjI0MzA4NzY0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 3. 3.Cook T, Kursumovic E, Lennane S. Exclusive: Deaths of NHS staff from covid-19 analysed. In: HSJ, editor.; 2020. 4. 4.Apea VJ, Wan YI, Dhairyawan R, Puthucheary ZA, Pearse RM, Orkin CM, et al. Ethnicity and outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 infection in East London: an observational cohort study. BMJ open. 2021;11(1):e042140–e. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042140 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoiYm1qb3BlbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMjoiMTEvMS9lMDQyMTQwIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDYvMTMvMjAyNC4wNi4xMS4yNDMwODc2NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 5. 5.Barsoum Z. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic and Health Workers of an Ethnic Group-A Slant on a Shocking Report. SN comprehensive clinical medicine. 2020:1–2. doi: 10.1007/s42399-020-00422-w [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s42399-020-00422-w&link_type=DOI) 6. 6.Phiri P, Delanerolle G, Al-Sudani A, Rathod S. COVID-19 and Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic Communities: A Complex Relationship Without Just Cause. JMIR public health and surveillance. 2021;7(2):e22581–e. doi: 10.2196/22581 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2196/22581&link_type=DOI) 7. 7.Raisi-Estabragh Z, McCracken C, Bethell MS, Cooper J, Cooper C, Caulfield MJ, et al. Greater risk of severe COVID-19 in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic populations is not explained by cardiometabolic, socioeconomic or behavioural factors, or by 25(OH)-vitamin D status: study of 1326 cases from the UK Biobank. (1741-3850 (Electronic)) 8. 8.Macpherson W. The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry: Report of an Inquiry by Sir William Macpherson of Cluny. London 1999. Available from: [https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment\_data/file/277111/4262.pdf](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/277111/4262.pdf) 9. 9.Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71 [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE1OiIzNzIvbWFyMjlfMi9uNzEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNi8xMy8yMDI0LjA2LjExLjI0MzA4NzY0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 10. 10.Adewole O, Cooper A, Gal M, Peters H, Edwards A, Lalli K. Does institutional racism contribute to adverse clinical outcomes among ethnic minority healthcare staff and employees during the COVID-19 pandemic? A systematic review. 2022. 11. 11.Lefebrve C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, al e. Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention 6.2 ed; 2021. 12. 12.Page MJ, Higgins JP, Sterne JA. 13. 13.McArthur A, Klugárová J, Yan H, Florescu S. Innovations in the systematic review of text and opinion. JBI Evidence Implementation. 2015;13(3):188–95. 14. 14.Munn Z, Moola S, Lisy K, Riitano D, Tufanaru C. Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data. International journal of evidence-based healthcare. 2015;13(3):147–53. 15. 15.Casp C. CASP qualitative checklist. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. 2018 16. 16.Specialist Unit for Review E. Questions to assist with the critical appraisal of cross-sectional studies. 2018 17. 17.Specialist Unit for Review E. Questions to assist with the critical appraisal of cohort studies. 2018 18. 18.Hanrath AT, Schim van der Loeff I, Lendrem DW, Baker KF, Price DA, McDowall P, et al. SARS-CoV-2 Testing of 11,884 Healthcare Workers at an Acute NHS Hospital Trust in England: A Retrospective Analysis. Frontiers in Medicine. 2021;8 19. 19.Jesuthasan J, Powell RA, Burmester V, Nicholls D. ’We weren’t checked in on, nobody spoke to us’: an exploratory qualitative analysis of two focus groups on the concerns of ethnic minority NHS staff during COVID-19. BMJ Open. 2021;11(12):e053396. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053396 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoiYm1qb3BlbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMzoiMTEvMTIvZTA1MzM5NiI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA2LzEzLzIwMjQuMDYuMTEuMjQzMDg3NjQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 20. 20. Jones Cr HFWTAMTTME. Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG in healthcare workers and other staff at North Bristol NHS Trust: a sociodemographic analysis (preprint). Medrxiv. 2020:2020.11.12.20230458. doi: 10.1101/2020.11.12.20230458 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMC4xMS4xMi4yMDIzMDQ1OHYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDYvMTMvMjAyNC4wNi4xMS4yNDMwODc2NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 21. 21.Martin CA, Pan D, Melbourne C, Teece L, Aujayeb A, Baggaley RF, et al. Predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a multi-ethnic cohort of United Kingdom healthcare workers: a prospective nationwide cohort study (UK-REACH). medRxiv. 2021:2021.12.16.21267934. doi: 10.1101/2021.12.16.21267934 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoibWVkcnhpdiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoyMToiMjAyMS4xMi4xNi4yMTI2NzkzNHYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDYvMTMvMjAyNC4wNi4xMS4yNDMwODc2NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 22. 22.Choudhry N, Drysdale K, Usai C, Leighton D, Sonagara V, Buchanan R, et al. Disparities of SARS-CoV-2 Nucleoprotein-Specific IgG in Healthcare Workers in East London, UK. FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE. 2021;8 doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.642723 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3389/fmed.2021.642723&link_type=DOI) 23. 23.Ken-Dror G, Wade C, Sharma SS, Irvin-Sellers M, Robin J, Fluck D, et al. SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in NHS healthcare workers in a large double-sited UK hospital. CLINICAL MEDICINE. 2021;21(3):E290–E4. doi: 10.7861/clinmed.2020-1096 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTI6ImNsaW5tZWRpY2luZSI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIyMS8zL2UyOTAiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNi8xMy8yMDI0LjA2LjExLjI0MzA4NzY0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 24. 24.Martyn EM, Whitaker H, Gil E, Ighomereho P, Lambe G, Conley R, et al. Disproportionate impact of SARS-CoV-2 on ethnic minority and frontline healthcare workers: A cross-sectional seroprevalence survey at a North London hospital. The Journal of infection. 2021;82(6):276–316. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.02.027 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jinf.2021.02.025&link_type=DOI) 25. 25.Maxime I, Ros K, Priya L, David N, Zahid A, Tracy M, et al. Research Square. 2022 doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1008151/v1 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.21203/rs.3.rs-1008151/v1&link_type=DOI) 26. 26.Shields A, Faustini SE, Perez-Toledo M, Jossi S, Aldera E, Allen JD, et al. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and asymptomatic viral carriage in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study. Thorax. 2020;75(12):1089. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2020-215414 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToidGhvcmF4am5sIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI3NS8xMi8xMDg5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDYvMTMvMjAyNC4wNi4xMS4yNDMwODc2NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 27. 27.Valdes AM, Moon JC, Vijay A, Chaturvedi N, Norrish A, Ikram A, et al. Longitudinal assessment of symptoms and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers across 5 hospitals to understand ethnic differences in infection risk. eClinicalMedicine. 2021;34 doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100835 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100835&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33880438&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 28. 28.Zheng C, Hafezi-Bakhtiari N, Cooper V, Davidson H, Habibi M, Riley P, et al. Characteristics and transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in healthcare workers at a London teaching hospital. JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION. 2020;106(2):325–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2020.07.025 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jhin.2020.07.025&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 29. 29.Verma AM, Goddard AF, O’Donoghue D, Newbery N, Phillips C, Trudgill N. The UK physician workforce: one-third at increased risk of death from COVID-19. Clinical Medicine. 2021;21(2):e161. doi: 10.7861/clinmed.2020-0756 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTI6ImNsaW5tZWRpY2luZSI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIyMS8yL2UxNjEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNi8xMy8yMDI0LjA2LjExLjI0MzA4NzY0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 30. 30.Ali P, Adam Z, West J, Pareek M, Raza M, Iqbal J. Perceptions of COVID-19-related risk and mortality among ethnically diverse healthcare professionals in the UK. Ethnicity & Health. 2021;26(1):1–10. doi: 10.1080/13557858.2020.1849568 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/13557858.2020.1849568&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 31. 31.Kapilashrami A, Otis M, Omodara D, Nandi A, Vats A, Adeniyi O, et al. Ethnic disparities in health & social care workers’ exposure, protection, and clinical management of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Critical Public Health. 2021:1–14. doi: 10.1080/09581596.2021.1959020 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/09581596.2021.1959020&link_type=DOI) 32. 32.Otu A, Ahinkorah BO, Ameyaw EK, Seidu A-A, Yaya S. One country, two crises: what Covid- 19 reveals about health inequalities among BAME communities in the United Kingdom and the sustainability of its health system? International Journal for Equity in Health. 2020;19(1):189. doi: 10.1186/s12939-020-01307-z [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s12939-020-01307-z&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33109197&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 33. 33.Qureshi I, Garcia R, Ali N, Randhawa G. Understanding the disproportionate effects of COVID-19 on nurses from ethnic minority backgrounds. Nursing standard. 2021;36(9):29–34. doi: 10.7748/ns.2021.e11645 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7748/ns.2021.e11645&link_type=DOI) 34. 34.King O, McGill C. South East Survey on BAME staff, the COVID-19 pandemic and wellbeing. NHS England; 2020. 35. 35.Chaudhry FB, Raza S, Raja KZ, Ahmad U. COVID 19 and BAME health care staff: Wrong place at the wrong time. Journal of global health. 2020;10(2):020358-. doi: 10.7189/jogh.10.020358 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7189/jogh.10.020358&link_type=DOI) 36. 36.Dey T, Sinha A. Ethnicity and COVID-19 - A commentary on “World Health Oganization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19)” (Int J Surg 2020;76:71-6). International Journal of Surgery. 2020;83:75–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.08.046 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.08.046&link_type=DOI) 37. 37.Ali P AZWJPMRMIJ. Perceptions of COVID-19-related risk and mortality among ethnically diverse healthcare professionals in the UK. Ethnicity & health. 2021;26(1):1–10. doi: 10.1080/13557858.2020.1849568 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/13557858.2020.1849568&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 38. 38.Panda N, Sinyard RD, Henrich N, Cauley CE, Hannenberg AA, Sonnay Y, et al. Redeployment of Health Care Workers in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study of Health System Leaders’ Strategies. Journal of Patient Safety. 2021;17(4) 39. 39.Esmail A, Kalra V, Abel P. A critical review of leadership interventions aimed at people from black and minority ethnic groups: Health Foundation; 2005. 40. 40.Crisp N. 24 hours to save the NHS: The Chief Executive’s account of reform 2000 to 2006: OUP Oxford; 2011. 41. 41.England NHS. A fair experience for all: Closing the ethnicity gap in rates of disciplinary action across the NHS workforce. 2019 42. 42.Organisation for Economic C-o, Development. The unequal impact of COVID-19: a spotlight on frontline workers, migrants and racial/ethnic minorities. 2022 43. 43.Moorthy A, Sankar TK. Emerging public health challenge in UK: perception and belief on increased COVID19 death among BAME healthcare workers. Journal of Public Health. 2020;42(3):486–92. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdaa096 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/pubmed/fdaa096&link_type=DOI) 44. 44.Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES). 2019 Data Analysis Report for NHS Trusts and Clinical Commissioning Groups. 2020 45. 45.Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES). 2020 Data Analysis Report for NHS Trusts and Clinical Commissioning Groups. 2021. 46. 46.Rimmer A. Ethnic minority staff: trust boards still do not reflect NHS workforce. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online). 2020;368 47. 47.Atewologun D, Kline R, Ochieng M. Fair to Refer. Reducing disproportionality in fitness to practise concerns reported to the GMC. 2019. 48. 48.West E, Nayar S, Taskila T, Al-Haboubi M. The progress and outcomes of black and minority ethnic (BME) nurses through the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s “Fitness to Practise” process. 2017 49. 49.Pope R. Organizational Silence in the NHS: ‘Hear no, See no, Speak no’. Journal of Change Management. 2019;19(1):45–66. doi: 10.1080/14697017.2018.1513055 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/14697017.2018.1513055&link_type=DOI) 50. 50.National Health Service (NHS). NHS Staff Survey 2021 National Results Briefing. 2021. 51. 51.Rhead RD, Chui Z, Bakolis I, Gazard B, Harwood H, MacCrimmon S, et al. Impact of workplace discrimination and harassment among National Health Service staff working in London trusts: results from the TIDES study. BJPsych Open. 2021;7(1):e10. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2020.137 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1192/bjo.2020.137&link_type=DOI) 52. 52.National Health Service (NHS). An overview of workforce data for nurses, midwives and health visitors in the NHS. 2021. 53. 53.Wright W, Khatri N. Bullying among nursing staff. Health care management review. 2015;40(2):139–47. 54. 54.Okechukwu CA, Souza K, Davis KD, de Castro AB. Discrimination, harassment, abuse, and bullying in the workplace: Contribution of workplace injustice to occupational health disparities. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2014;57(5):573–86. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22221 [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/ajim.22221&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F13%2F2024.06.11.24308764.atom) 55. 55.Carter M, Thompson N, Crampton P, Morrow G, Burford B, Gray C, et al. Workplace bullying in the UK NHS: a questionnaire and interview study on prevalence, impact and barriers to reporting. BMJ Open. 2013;3(6):e002628. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002628 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NzoiYm1qb3BlbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMy82L2UwMDI2MjgiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNi8xMy8yMDI0LjA2LjExLjI0MzA4NzY0LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==)