In this chapter, we summarize the existing literature on self-reported experiences of racial/ethnic discrimination and health status among Latina/o persons in the USA, explore the implications for Latina/o/x health, and identify future directions of research in this critical area.We reviewed 25 peer-reviewed articles that quantitatively xamined the association between self-reported discrimination and mental or physical health, published between 2000 and 2016. The reviewed studies were primarily cross-sectional and few compared Latina/o subgroups. We encourage researchers to examine the health impacts of racial/ethnic discrimination on Latina/o health through intersectionality theory to assess discrimination across multiple intersecting social statuses. We also recommend that researchers examine the longitudinal health consequences of structural forms of racism such as carceral policies, educational policies, environmental quality, immigration enforcement, residential segregation, and health care access and quality across spatial contexts.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a policy scan of state and local laws and policies across the United States related to social determinants of health among immigrants. METHODS: We collected all state and municipal laws and policies in 10 domains that had potential to affect immigrant health from all 50 U.S. states and the 30 most populous U.S. metropolitan statistical areas. We coded these laws and policies and created an index of restrictiveness and supportiveness of immigrants. RESULTS: We identified 539 state and 322 municipal laws and policies. The most common restrictive state laws and policies were in the domains of identification requirements and drivers license access. The most common supportive state laws and policies were in the domains of health services and higher education access. The most common restrictive municipal laws and policies were in the domains of identification requirements and immigration policy enforcement. The most common supportive municipal laws and policies were in the domains of immigration policy enforcement and health services access. CONCLUSIONS: Most states had index scores reflecting policy environments that were primarily restrictive of immigrants, indicating potential negative impacts on social determinants of health. Further research examining the impact of these on health behaviors is warranted.

BACKGROUND: This study examines how the North Carolina state prevention system responded to a policy shift from individual-level prevention strategies to environmental strategies from the perspective of the organizations implementing the policy shift. METHODS: We use two data sources. First, we conducted interviews to collect qualitative data from key informants. Second, we used prevention provider agency expenditure data from the year the shift was announced and the following year. RESULTS: The interviews allowed us to identify effective features of policy change implementation in complex systems, such as the need for clear communication and guidance about the policy changes. Our interview and expenditure analyses also underscore variation in the level of guidance and oversight provided by implementing agencies to prevention providers. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses suggest that more active monitoring and oversight may have facilitated more consistent implementation of the policy shift toward greater use of environmental prevention strategies.