Abstract
Health disparities that are seen in underserved and underrepresented communities are a pressing issue in healthcare. These disparities are embedded into our society through structural inequalities that lead to poorer health outcomes in those from minoritised communities. In its place as the heart of modern healthcare, the biomedical science workforce has the potential to play a crucial role in mitigating these disparities by fostering greater cultural competence, improving patient outcomes and driving innovative solutions. This study reviewed the current literature on the impact of diversity within the biomedical science workforce on health disparities in underserved communities. The review demonstrated where embedded inequities in healthcare lead to worse health outcomes for underserved communities. These disparities are found across healthcare education, diagnostic processes as well as within research and innovation, and this work uses the COVID-19 Pandemic as an example of where health disparities have significant consequences for the communities impacted. This review demonstrates that a diverse biomedical science workforce can not only contribute to better health outcomes, but also to inclusive research agendas and clinical studies by ensuring that research priorities are more representative of a broader population. A more diverse biomedical science workforce can serve as role models and mentors, inspiring the next-generation of biomedical scientists from underrepresented backgrounds creating a continuous cycle of inclusion and representation, helping to reduce health disparities over time. Therefore, a key strategy in promoting health equity is by increasing diversity in the biomedical science field. After review of current published works, the authors have proposed a list of recommendations that outline steps institutions, professional bodies and policymakers could take to a strategic and sustained commitment to improving biomedical science workforce diversity in an effort to reduce health disparities.
Introduction
Biomedical science sits at the heart of modern healthcare, with an estimated 95% of clinical pathways requiring access to pathology services, yet its potential to address persistent health disparities remains constrained by a lack of diversity within the field [1–3]. Despite advances in medicine, entire communities continue to be left behind, not because of biology, but because of systemic gaps in representation, research, and relevance [4, 5].
These disparities, marked by unequal health outcomes across population groups, are deeply rooted in structural inequalities such as socioeconomic status, race, geography, and historical exclusion from healthcare systems [5–10].
Increasing representation in biomedical science is more than an ethical goal; it is a scientific necessity. Diverse teams contribute broader perspectives, challenge prevailing assumptions, and lead to more inclusive and impactful research [2, 8, 11, 12]. When scientists bring lived experience and cultural understanding into their work, they help ensure that the questions being asked, and the solutions being developed, are relevant to a wider range of communities [12–14].
A more representative biomedical workforce can help correct these imbalances; expanding access to research participation, improving health outcomes, and reshaping the future of science to be more equitable, inclusive, and responsive. This work will review the currently available literature on health disparities and the impact of diversity within the biomedical science workforce and provide recommendations to support the workforce to rebalance these disparities.
Understanding Health Disparities
Health disparities refer to the preventable and unjust differences in health outcomes experienced by specific population groups [8]. These disparities are not random, they follow clear patterns tied to social, economic, environmental, and structural factors [6, 8]. People from ethnic minority backgrounds, those living in poverty, and individuals in geographically underserved regions consistently face higher rates of chronic illness, reduced access to preventive services, and shorter life expectancies [6, 15–17]. Examples of this include the United States where the maternal mortality rates in Black Americans are more than triple of other ethnic groups [18].
This has also been demonstrated in the United Kingdom where there is a marked difference in life expectancy at birth between those living in the least and most affluent areas - a striking indicator of how socioeconomic position shapes health trajectories [19, 20]. These differences are further exacerbated by ethnicity: minority ethnic populations are more likely to suffer from conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, and stroke at earlier ages and with worse outcomes [21–24].
It is important to highlight that as health disparities are the result of structural inequities, such as discriminatory housing policies, limited access to quality education and environmental injustice that shape people’s lives long before they enter a clinic or hospital [25].
Within healthcare systems, these disparities are further compounded by implicit bias, communication barriers, and mistrust. Patients from underrepresented backgrounds are more likely to experience misdiagnosis, lower-quality care, and diminished engagement with providers. Language differences, cultural misunderstandings, and a lack of representation among clinical staff often lead to poorer outcomes and decreased patient satisfaction [8, 17, 18].
Biomedical science plays a key role in both reflecting and addressing these disparities. Historically research has excluded the populations most affected by poor health outcomes. Minority participants are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials, while research agendas have tended to prioritize conditions affecting majority populations [26]. This could lead to the development of treatments and diagnostic tools that are less effective, or even inappropriate, for some groups.
The Role of Cultural Competence
Cultural competence refers to the practice of aiming to create a workforce who have explored and are able to understand how cultural differences may shape how a patient’s values relate to healthcare [27]. Much of the public focus rests on frontline clinicians, however, the impact of biomedical scientists, often working behind the scenes in healthcare, is just as critical in shaping equitable health outcomes. By fostering cultural competence amongst its professionals, biomedical science can aim to help address the structural disparities that are embedded in health.
People’s beliefs about illness, how they seek help, respond to diagnoses, and engage with treatment are shaped by cultural, religious, linguistic, and socioeconomic contexts [28–30]. Biomedical science professionals who are culturally competent are more attuned to these factors and better equipped to ensure that their work supports appropriate, inclusive, and responsive healthcare delivery [29, 31–33].
This can impact on diagnostics where a failure to understand cultural variation in diet, language, or symptom expression can lead to misinterpretation of test results, misdiagnosis, or inappropriate treatment pathways, particularly as minority groups remain underrepresented in many baseline studies used for assay reference ranges [34, 35].
Patients from underrepresented communities are more likely to report negative experiences shaped by assumptions, stereotypes, and poor communication [30]. While biomedical scientists may not always interact directly with patients, their decisions and outputs feed directly into clinical practice. When healthcare professionals are aware of cultural nuance, they can more accurately support diagnosis and treatment, and contribute to a system that respects and responds to patient diversity.
While attempting to embed cultural competence in the workplace, care must be taken to avoid reducing a culture to a set of traits, leading to generalisations or stereotyping, which has been raised as a risk with traditional models [36]. In response, the concept of cultural humility has emerged - placing emphasis on self-reflection, an openness to lifelong learning, and a recognition of systemic power imbalances that affect both care and science [29].
Incorporating cultural humility into biomedical science education means creating a space for professionals to question their own assumptions, engage with diverse lived experiences, and understand the broader social conditions that shape health. It also means recognising the limits of one’s own knowledge and actively involving patients and communities as partners in care and innovation [37–39].
Embedding cultural competence and humility across biomedical roles can form a powerful bridge between science and society. This approach supports the broader imperative to build a biomedical workforce that not only reflects, but also understands and serves, the diverse communities it aims to support.
Diversity in the Biomedical Workforce
Building a culturally competent biomedical science workforce begins with ensuring that the workforce itself is diverse. Representation across ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic background, disability, and other dimensions of identity is essential for both equity in employment and for improving health outcomes across the population. Diverse teams bring a wider range of perspectives and insights, all of which are critical for understanding and addressing the complex health needs of increasingly diverse societies [40].
Despite growing recognition of the importance of diversity, the biomedical science workforce remains unbalanced. In 2024 The Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) data showed that 55% of registered biomedical scientists identified as White, with just 18% identifying as Asian and 18% as Black [2]. The HCPC 2024 data demonstrates that 4% of registered biomedical scientists reported having a disability, significantly lower than the wider population across England and Wales which reported 17.7% and 20.1% respectively in the 2021 census [2, 41]. In Northern Ireland and Scotland, 24.3% and 21.4% respectively reported living with a long-term illness or health condition in the 2021 (N. Ireland) and 2022 (Scotland) national census [42, 43].
This lack of representation risks a culture of exclusion in which minority voices are absent not only from the workforce but also from decision-making tables, research priority-setting, and institutional policy development [6, 26, 44].
A diverse workforce also plays a vital role in building trust. Communities that have historically been marginalized or harmed by medical institutions, such as Black communities in the wake of unethical experimentation, or migrant populations who have experienced discrimination in healthcare settings, are more likely to engage with systems where they see themselves represented [30, 45]. Representation in the laboratory, in diagnostics, and in public health roles sends a powerful signal that all communities are valued and understood.
In addition, individuals from diverse backgrounds can bring an intrinsic awareness of the challenges their communities face - from barriers to accessing care, to cultural stigmas surrounding certain conditions and specific patterns of disease [46, 47]. These insights can inform relevant, and effective healthcare solutions. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, faith centres were used as vaccination centres in order to improve vaccine uptake in previously under-served communities [48].
Diversity is not just about being present, it is also about who feels supported, heard, and is able to thrive. Tokenistic representation without meaningful inclusion can lead to burnout, isolation, and high turnover [49, 50].
Expanding and retaining diversity in biomedical science therefore requires a comprehensive approach: one that addresses recruitment, but also tackles the systemic barriers that prevent individuals from underrepresented backgrounds from advancing. This includes ensuring equitable access to leadership pathways and career development opportunities. This would support the development of a diverse and inclusive biomedical workforce that is central to achieving an equitable healthcare system.
Impact on Research and Innovation
The impact of a diverse biomedical science workforce extends beyond the laboratory and into the heart of healthcare delivery. When the professionals designing diagnostics, developing treatments, and interpreting data reflect the populations they serve, the results are more inclusive, relevant, and effective [51, 52].
Historically, biomedical research has been built around majority populations with a lack of representation impacting on effective patient care. Treatments, diagnostic tools, and reference ranges may not perform equally across populations, contributing to misdiagnosis, adverse drug reactions, and suboptimal care. For example, pulse oximeters have been shown to deliver less accurate readings in individuals with darker skin tones, a flaw that remained unchallenged for years due to the lack of diversity in both clinical testing and scientific scrutiny [53–55].
Diverse teams are more likely to ensure that research designs account for biological, environmental, and sociocultural variation [56]. Additionally, they are more likely to prioritize health challenges that disproportionately affect their own communities, such as asthma prevalence in urban Black populations and deprived areas, higher stroke risks among South Asians, or limited access to reproductive care in migrant communities [57–59]. These insights shift the focus of biomedical science toward greater health equity.
Beyond content, diversity strengthens the scientific process itself. Numerous studies have shown that teams with varied backgrounds are more innovative, more rigorous in testing assumptions, and better at solving complex problems [59–61]. In biomedical science, this intellectual diversity is critical to developing the kinds of robust, real-world solutions.
Diverse researchers are more likely to engage in community-based and participatory research, using methods that emphasise collaboration with affected populations and promote mutual trust [62]. This not only improves data quality but can help ensure that research findings are actually implemented in ways that benefit the people they are meant to serve.
Underrepresentation in research does not just affect patients; it influences who benefits from funding, publication opportunities, and academic recognition [63]. Structural inequities in research funding and authorship further marginalise voices, further compounding the issues that disproportionately affect underserved populations by limiting their visibility [64–66].
Addressing these imbalances is essential for the progression of biomedical science. Equitable innovation leads to better technologies, more precise diagnostics, and more effective therapies for the entire patient population.
Education and Mentorship: A Pipeline Problem
The systemic barriers that affect the biomedical workforce do not start in the workplace, they begin early in the educational journey. The underrepresentation is rooted in structural inequalities that affect access to education, visibility of role models, and the availability of meaningful mentorship [4, 12, 67, 68].
In higher education, attrition rates remain disproportionately high for students on biomedical science programmes [60, 69, 70]. Mentorship is one of the most effective interventions to improve retention, performance, and professional satisfaction among students and early-career professionals from underrepresented groups [29, 71]. Good mentors provide more than academic guidance; they offer psychosocial support, help navigate institutional systems, and serve as tangible proof that success is possible. Mentorship can be the key difference between remaining in a field or seeking employment elsewhere.
Yet, access to mentorship is not equitably distributed. Minority mentors may be overburdened, expected to support large numbers of students or trainees while also carrying the extra labour of diversity-related service and outreach in a ‘cultural’ or ‘time’ tax [72, 73]. This may further embed the current structural inequities that lead to health disparities.
The Case of COVID-19: A Stress Test
The COVID-19 pandemic served as a global stress test for health systems, exposing long-standing inequalities and demonstrating the life-and-death consequences of structural disparities. Across many developed countries, ethnic minority groups experienced disproportionately high rates of infection, hospitalisation, and death [74, 75].
Frontline roles that carried a higher risk of exposure in transport, social care, retail, and the NHS were disproportionately occupied by people from minority ethnic communities [76]. Compounding this were existing health conditions that have higher prevalence in ethnic minority communities, such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease [77, 78].
Additionally, the pandemic revealed weaknesses in how biomedical science responds to diverse populations. Public health messaging often failed to account for language diversity or cultural nuance. Initial clinical trials for COVID-19 treatments and vaccines underrepresented Black and Asian participants [79, 80]. Diagnostic tools, including pulse oximeters, were shown to be less reliable on darker skin tones, impacting on patients that were more likely to be significantly affected [53–55].
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted where lack of trust in healthcare was an issue. Communities with historical reasons to distrust healthcare institutions were understandably hesitant about engaging with contact tracing, vaccination, or hospital care [48].
A more diverse biomedical workforce - one equipped with the cultural competence and community ties could be used to bridge gaps in understanding, reassure hesitant populations, and deliver care that felt safe and respectful.
Importantly, the crisis catalysed several rapid interventions, such as community-led vaccination initiatives and culturally tailored public health campaigns [81–83], that demonstrated the value of diverse perspectives and community engagement in health science. These examples offer a blueprint for how biomedical science can be both inclusive and responsive, especially in times of crisis.
The COVID-19 pandemic should be seen as a warning and a call to action. Future public health emergencies, whether pandemics, climate-driven events, or emerging diseases, will demand a workforce that understands the needs of all communities, not just the majority. Investing in diversity, equity, and inclusion within biomedical science is no longer optional, it is a matter of public health preparedness and ethical responsibility.
The Laboratory Workforce: Often Overlooked, Critically Important
While clinicians and researchers often occupy the spotlight in conversations about healthcare, the laboratory workforce remains one of the most vital (and most under-recognised) pillars of the biomedical system. Biomedical scientists, clinical scientists and laboratory support staff form the backbone of disease detection, monitoring, and surveillance, often without significant public visibility.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought this issue into sharp relief. Laboratory teams were responsible for rapidly developing and scaling up diagnostic tests, tracking viral variants, and informing national and global health responses with significant capacity and reporting issues [84]. In the UK, the Lighthouse Labs network and NHS laboratory services worked tirelessly under immense pressure [85, 86]. Despite this, the contributions of biomedical science professionals were rarely acknowledged in public discourse, and even less so were the disparities within the workforce itself.
Diversity within the laboratory setting is not just a matter of workplace equity, it directly affects the quality and inclusivity of healthcare. A homogenous lab workforce risks blind spots in diagnostic development, data interpretation, and decision-making [87]. For example, reference values in haematology and biochemistry are often derived from narrow population samples, which can lead to misinterpretation of results when applied to individuals from different ethnic backgrounds [88, 89]. A more diverse workforce brings the lived experience and cultural insight needed to question these defaults, advocate for more representative data, and ensure diagnostic accuracy for all patients [90, 91].
Inclusive laboratory environments tend to foster innovation, collaboration, and retention. Diverse teams are better positioned to spot emerging health trends, challenge bias in test development, and ensure that the tools used in clinical decision-making are robust and equitable [6]. These qualities are especially critical during public health emergencies, where rapid, culturally informed responses can save lives.
Despite their importance, many aspiring biomedical scientists from underrepresented backgrounds face significant barriers to entering and advancing in the field. For those who do enter the profession, experiences of microaggressions, cultural exclusion, and inequitable career progression can hinder retention and morale [92].
Addressing these issues requires deliberate investment. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) must be embedded into laboratory training programmes, professional development opportunities, and workplace cultures [93, 94].
By investing in a more diverse and inclusive laboratory workforce, the biomedical science field can not only improve the quality and relevance of diagnostics, but also ensure that the broader healthcare system is better equipped to serve all communities. Recognition, representation, and inclusion in this often-overlooked corner of healthcare are long overdue—but critically important for advancing health equity.
Policy and Institutional Interventions
As demonstrated so far in this work, addressing inequity in the biomedical science workforce requires systemic, sustained change at the institutional and policy levels. Policies and initiatives that aim to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) must be woven into the fabric of biomedical institutions - from universities and research councils to healthcare organisations and professional bodies. Policies will require measurable goals and clear frameworks for accountability to avoid any changes being short-lived or failing to demonstrate impact.
There are UK models to improve workforce equity that are currently being implemented. The NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) tracks disparities in hiring, promotion, and staff experience by ethnicity, holding organisations accountable for progress [51]. Similarly, the Athena Swan Charter, originally focused on gender equality in academia, has expanded to include intersectional approaches to inclusion across disciplines, including biomedical sciences [51]. In the U.S., the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Disparities Action Plan provides a comprehensive roadmap for reducing health disparities through inclusive research, workforce development, and community engagement [95].
However, policies must move beyond checklists and reporting. Real change requires action: actively recruiting from underrepresented groups, providing anti-bias and cultural humility training, reforming leadership pipelines, and removing structural barriers to promotion and career advancement. Institutions must be prepared to challenge long-standing practices that have historically favoured homogeneity - whether in hiring committees, grant allocation, or the peer review process. The regulatory body for biomedical scientists, the Health and Care Professions Council, updated standards of proficiency that all biomedical scientists practising in the UK must uphold to place a greater emphasis on equality, diversity and inclusion [96].
Implementation of such policies must be accompanied by transparency, with regular collection and publication of workforce demographic data allows institutions to identify gaps, track progress, while also providing external accountability.
The structural nature of health disparities demands structural responses. When institutions take a proactive, policy-driven approach to inclusion, the biomedical workforce becomes more reflective of society, and better equipped to improve health outcomes for all.
Recommendations for the Future
To effectively reduce health disparities and ensure that biomedical science is responsive to the needs of all communities, a strategic and sustained commitment to workforce diversity is essential. The previous sections have shown how underrepresentation affects not just who enters the profession, but also what questions are asked, how health data is interpreted, and who benefits from biomedical innovation. The following recommendations outline concrete steps that institutions, policymakers, and professional bodies can take to drive meaningful change. These recommendations are targeted towards the UK biomedical science workforce, but could be replicated in diagnostic laboratory workforces in other countries:
Early Pipeline Development
Diversity in biomedical science begins long before individuals enter the profession. Outreach programmes targeting primary and secondary schools, particularly in underserved areas, can help build early awareness of biomedical science careers. Initiatives should include hands-on lab experiences, school visits from diverse professionals, and partnerships between educational institutions and healthcare organisations to provide clear, supported pathways into the field.
Inclusive Education and Curriculum Reform
Biomedical science education must be relevant to the populations it ultimately serves. Academic curricula should embed cultural competence, cultural humility, and an understanding of health disparities from the outset. Teaching should challenge the myth of scientific neutrality and highlight the social and ethical contexts in which biomedical science operates.
Structured and Culturally Responsive Mentorship
Mentorship is a powerful tool for retention and success, but it must be intentional and inclusive. Institutions should develop structured mentoring programmes that match students and early-career professionals with diverse, trained mentors who can provide both academic guidance and psychosocial support. Mentors should receive training in culturally responsive practices to avoid reinforcing systemic biases.
Leadership Diversity and Representation
Representation in leadership sends a strong message about an organisation’s values. Institutions must prioritise the promotion of underrepresented individuals into leadership roles and ensure that decision-making bodies reflect the communities they serve. This includes rethinking criteria for advancement, addressing bias in evaluations, and providing leadership development opportunities that are accessible to all.
Data Transparency and Accountability
Institutional progress on diversity must be measurable. Regular collection and public reporting of demographic data on hiring, promotion, pay equity, and workplace climate are essential for tracking progress and identifying gaps. These data should inform targeted interventions and be reviewed by internal and external stakeholders to ensure accountability.
Equitable Research and Funding Structures
Funding agencies and research institutions must ensure that their processes do not unintentionally exclude underrepresented researchers or populations. This means supporting community-led research, requiring diversity plans in funding applications, and investing in studies that address health issues in marginalised groups. Peer review panels and grant boards should also be diverse and trained in recognising unconscious bias.
DEI Integration in Laboratory and Clinical Practice
All biomedical science workplaces (laboratories, diagnostic centres, and public health teams) should integrate DEI principles into hiring, training, and daily operations. Culturally competent workplace practices improve morale, foster innovation, and ensure that the scientific outputs of these environments are more accurate and equitable. Diversity should be seen not as a separate issue but as integral to the function and success of biomedical science.
Community Engagement and Co-Creation
Health equity cannot be achieved without engaging the communities most affected by disparities. Biomedical institutions should form partnerships with community organisations to co-design research, diagnostics, and interventions. Such collaboration builds trust, enhances relevance, and ensures that science serves real-world needs.
These recommendations are not isolated fixes but part of a broader systems-level change. Achieving a truly diverse biomedical workforce, and the equitable health outcomes it can support, requires consistent effort, leadership commitment, and a willingness to challenge the status quo. The future of biomedical science must be inclusive by design, not by exception.
Conclusion
Health disparities are not inevitable. They are the result of systems and structures that have too often excluded, overlooked, or underserved entire communities. Biomedical science, as a foundation of modern healthcare, holds enormous potential to challenge these inequities. But that potential cannot be fully realised without a workforce that reflects the diversity of the populations it aims to serve.
Throughout this review, the case has been made that diversifying the biomedical workforce is not only a moral imperative but a practical necessity. Representation enhances cultural competence, supports inclusive education, drives innovative research, and strengthens public trust. It ensures that the insights, knowledge, and lived experiences of all communities are valued and embedded within the science that shapes healthcare delivery.
When biomedical science professionals come from a range of ethnic, cultural, socioeconomic, and geographic backgrounds, they bring perspectives that improve the relevance and effectiveness of diagnostics, treatments, and public health strategies. A more inclusive laboratory workforce can identify gaps in diagnostic tools, push for better data, and serve as advocates for equitable care, even behind the scenes.
As global health challenges grow more complex (from pandemics and climate-related illnesses to rising chronic disease) ensuring that biomedical science is equipped to serve all communities is more urgent than ever. A diverse workforce is not a silver bullet, but it is one of the most powerful tools we have for creating a more just and effective health system.
To build a future where everyone has the opportunity for good health, the field of biomedical science must reflect the full spectrum of society - not just in its workforce, but in its values, priorities, and practices. That future begins now.
Statements
Author contributions
CP and VH contributed to the conceptualisation and literature review. CP was responsible for writing the original draft. VH was responsible for reviewing, editing the writing and responding to corrections. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to express their thanks to Steve Cross. Without his dedication and incredible Talent Factory this important review would never have come into existence.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
References
1.
NHS England. Digital First: Clinical Transformation Through Pathology Innovation (2014). Available online at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/pathol-dig-first.pdf (Accessed May 11, 2025).
2.
Health and Care Professions Council. Diversity Data: Biomedical Scientists - January 2024 (2024). Available online at: https://www.hcpc-uk.org/resources/data/2024/diversity-data-biomedical-scientists-2024/ (Accessed May 12, 2025).
3.
Health and Care Professions Council. Register Over Time (2025). Available online at: https://www.hcpc-uk.org/data/the-register/register-over-time/ (Accessed July 20, 2025).
4.
Clark US Hurd YL . Addressing Racism and Disparities in the Biomedical Sciences. Nat Hum Behav (2020) 4(8):774–7. 10.1038/s41562-020-0917-7
5.
Robertson R Williams E Buck D Breckwoldt J . Ethnic Health Inequalities and the NHS (2021). Available online at: https://www.nhsrho.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Ethnic-Health-Inequalities-Kings-Fund-Report.pdf (Accessed May 11, 2025).
6.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Communities in Action: Pathways to Health Equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press (2017). 10.17226/24624
7.
Fiscella K Williams DR . Health Disparities Based on Socioeconomic Inequities: Implications for Urban Health Care. Acad Med (2004) 79(12):1139–47. 10.1097/00001888-200412000-00004
8.
UK Government. Health Disparities and Health Inequalities: Applying all Our Health (2022). Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-disparities-and-health-inequalities-applying-all-our-health/health-disparities-and-health-inequalities-applying-all-our-health (Accessed April 16, 2025).
9.
World Health Organisation. Health Inequities and Their Causes (2018). Available online at: https://www.who.int/news-room/facts-in-pictures/detail/health-inequities-and-their-causes (Accessed April 16, 2025).
10.
Ayedun A Agbelese V Curry L Gotian R Castillo-Page L White M et al Perspectives on National Institutes of Health Funding Requirements for Racial and Ethnic Diversity Among Medical Scientist Training Program Leadership. JAMA Netw Open (2023) 6(5):e2310795. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.10795
11.
Institute of Biomedical Science. Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (2024). Available online at: https://www.ibms.org/about/equity-diversity-and-inclusion/ (Accessed 16 April 2025).
12.
Swartz TH Palermo A-GS Masur SK Aberg JA . The Science and Value of Diversity: Closing the Gaps in Our Understanding of Inclusion and Diversity. The J Infect Dis (2019) 220(Suppl. 2):S33–S41. 10.1093/infdis/jiz174
13.
Gates C Farley K Mark N . It Together: Where Research and Real World Experience Meet (2025). Available online at: https://spotlight.leeds.ac.uk/world-changers/in-it-together/ (Accessed April 16, 2025).
14.
Myers SL Fealing KH . Changes in the Representation of Women and Minorities in Biomedical Careers. Acad Med (2012) 87(11):1525–9. 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31826d7189
15.
British Medical Association. A Missed Opportunity: BMA Response to the Race Report (2021). Available online at: https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/equality-and-diversity-guidance/race-equality-in-medicine/race-inequalities-and-ethnic-disparities-in-healthcare (Accessed April 16, 2025).
16.
National Institute of Health Research. Multiple Long-Term Conditions (Multimorbidity) and Inequality-Addressing the Challenge: Insights from Research (2023). 10.3310/nihrevidence_59977
17.
The King’s Fund. What Are Health Inequalities? (2022). Available online at: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/long-reads/what-are-health-inequalities (Accessed on April 16, 2025).
18.
Hoyert DL . Health E-Stat 100: Maternal Mortality Rates in the United States, 2023 (2025). Available online at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2023/maternal-mortality-rates-2023.htm (Accessed May 12, 2025).
19.
Office for National Statistics. Health State Life Expectancies by National Deprivation Deciles, England: 2018 to 2020 (2022). Available online at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthinequalities/bulletins/healthstatelifeexpectanciesbyindexofmultipledeprivationimd/2018to2020 (Accessed May 12, 2025).
20.
Office for National Statistics. Health State Life Expectancies by National Deprivation Quintiles, Wales: 2018 to 2020 (2022). Available online at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthinequalities/bulletins/healthstatelifeexpectanciesbynationaldeprivationdecileswales/2018to2020 (Accessed May 12, 2025).
21.
Abuelgasim E Saw LJ Shirke M Zeinah M Harky A . COVID-19: Unique Public Health Issues Facing Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Communities. Curr Probl Cardiol (2020) 45(8):100621. 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2020.100621
22.
Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities. Ethnic Disparities in the Major Causes of Mortality and Their Risk Factors – A Rapid Review (2021). Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-report-of-the-commission-on-race-and-ethnic-disparities-supporting-research/ethnic-disparities-in-the-major-causes-of-mortality-and-their-risk-factors-by-dr-raghib-ali-et-al (Accessed April 16, 2025).
23.
The King’s Fund. The Health of People from Ethnic Minority Groups in England (2023). Available online at: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/long-reads/health-people-ethnic-minority-groups-england (Accessed April 16, 2025).
24.
Hayanga B Stafford M Bécares L . Ethnic Inequalities in Multiple Long-Term Health Conditions in the United Kingdom: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis. BMC Public Health (2023) 23(1):178. 10.1186/s12889-022-14940-w
25.
Baptiste D Commodore‐Mensah Y Alexander KA Jacques K Wilson PR Akomah J et al COVID‐19: Shedding Light on Racial and Health Inequities in the USA. J Clin Nurs (2020) 29(15–16):2734–6. 10.1111/jocn.15351
26.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine; Committee on Improving the Representation of Women and Underrepresented Minorities in Clinical Trials and Research. Why Diverse Representation in Clinical Research Matters and the Current State of Representation Within the Clinical Research Ecosystem. In: Bibbins-DomingoKHelmanA, editors. Improving Representation in Clinical Trials and Research: Building Research Equity for Women and Underrepresented Groups. Washington, DC: National Academies Press US (2022). Available online at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36137057/ (Accessed May 12, 2025).
27.
Betancourt JR Green AR . Chapter 9 Cultural Competence: Healthcare Disparities and Political Issues. In: WalkerPFBarnettED, editors. Immigrant Medicine. W.B. Saunders (2007). p. 99–109.
28.
Kurec A . Diversity, Equity, Inclusion—Managing and Leading Today’s Diverse Laboratory Workforce. Medical Laboratory Observer (2023). Available online at: https://www.mlo-online.com/management/article/53060991/diversity-equity-inclusion-managing-and-leading-todays-diverse-laboratory-workforce (Accessed April 16, 2025).
29.
Marshall AG Vue Z Beasley HK Neikirk K Stephens D Wanjalla CN et al Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Laboratory: Strategies to Enhance Inclusive Laboratory Culture. Mol Cell (2023) 83(21):3766–72. 10.1016/j.molcel.2023.09.011
30.
Vitus OC . The Importance of Cultural Competence in Biomedical Education: Preparing Future Healthcare Providers. Biomed Stud Clin Evaluations (2024) 1(5). 10.9567/ISSN.2024/WSJ.80
31.
Beach MC Cooper LA Robinson KA Price EG Gary TL Jenckes MW et al Strategies for Improving Minority Healthcare Quality: Summary. In: AHRQ Evidence Report Summaries. Rockville, United States: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality US (2004). Available online at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11918/ (Accessed May 12, 2025).
32.
Nair L Adetayo OA . Cultural Competence and Ethnic Diversity in Healthcare. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open (2019) 7(5):e2219. 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002219
33.
Holladay EB . The Diversity Drive: A More Diverse Workforce Is Crucial to the Success of Pathology Labs (2024). Available online at: https://thepathologist.com/issues/2024/articles/mar/the-diversity-drive (Accessed 16 April 2025).
34.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Improving Diagnosis in Health Care. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press (2015). 10.17226/21794
35.
Rappoport N Paik H Oskotsky B Tor R Ziv E Zaitlen N et al Comparing Ethnicity-Specific Reference Intervals for Clinical Laboratory Tests from EHR Data. The J Appl Lab Med (2018) 3(3):366–77. 10.1373/jalm.2018.026492
36.
Kirmayer LJ . Rethinking Cultural Competence. Transcultural Psychiatry (2012) 49(2):149–64. 10.1177/1363461512444673
37.
Chang E Simon M Dong X . Integrating Cultural Humility into Health Care Professional Education and Training. Adv Health Sci Education (2012) 17(2):269–78. 10.1007/s10459-010-9264-1
38.
Robinson D Masters C Ansari A . The 5 Rs of Cultural Humility: A Conceptual Model for Health Care Leaders. The Am J Med (2021) 134(2):161–3. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2020.09.029
39.
Tervalon M Murray-García J . Cultural Humility Versus Cultural Competence: A Critical Distinction in Defining Physician Training Outcomes in Multicultural Education. J Health Care Poor Underserved (1998) 9(2):117–25. 10.1353/hpu.2010.0233
40.
Stanford FC . The Importance of Diversity and Inclusion in the Healthcare Workforce. J Natl Med Assoc (2020) 112(3):247–9. 10.1016/j.jnma.2020.03.014
41.
Office of National Statistics. Disability, England and Wales: Census 2021 (2023). Available online at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandwellbeing/bulletins/disabilityenglandandwales/census2021 (Accessed May 26, 2025).
42.
Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency. Main Statistics for Northern Ireland Statistical Bulletin Health Disability and Unpaid Care (2022). Available online at: https://niopa.qub.ac.uk/bitstream/NIOPA/15773/1/census-2021-main-statistics-for-northern-ireland-phase-2-statistical-bulletin-health-disability-and-unpaid-care.pdf (Accessed July 20, 2025).
43.
Scotland’s Census. Scotland’s Census 2022 Health, Disability and Unpaid Care (2024). Available online at: https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/2022-reports/scotland-s-census-2022-health-disability-and-unpaid-care/ (Accessed July 20, 2025).
44.
UK Parliament. Diversity and Inclusion in STEM (2023). Available online at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmsctech/95/report.html (Accessed May 12, 2025).
45.
Hostetter M Klein S . Understanding and Ameliorating Medical Mistrust Among Black Americans. New York, United States: The Commonwealth Fund (2021). 10.26099/9grt-2b21
46.
Benabentos R Ray P Kumar D . Addressing Health Disparities in the Undergraduate Curriculum: An Approach to Develop a Knowledgeable Biomedical Workforce. CBE—Life Sci Education (2014) 13(4):636–40. 10.1187/cbe.14-06-0101
47.
Johnson J-A Ahluwalia S . Neurodiversity in the Healthcare Profession. Postgrad Med J (2025) 101(1192):167–71. 10.1093/postmj/qgae108
48.
Wehling H Weston D Hall C Mills F Amlôt R Dennis A et al Use of UK Faith Centre as a COVID-19 Community Vaccination Clinic: Exploring a Potential Model for Community-Based Health Care Delivery. Postgrad Med J (2024) 100(1188):P751–759. 10.1093/postmj/qgae028
49.
Ely R Thomas D . Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives on Work Group Processes and Outcomes. Administrative Sci Q - ADMIN SCI QUART. (2001) 46:229–73. 10.2307/2667087
50.
Green S . Successful but Exhausted: The Effect of Tokenism on Black Employees Doctor of Philosophy. Baton Rouge, United States: Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College (2023). 10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.6256
51.
Priest N Esmail A Kline R Rao M Coghill Y Williams DR . Promoting Equality for Ethnic Minority NHS staff—What Works?BMJ (2015) 351:h3297. 10.1136/bmj.h3297
52.
Whelan C . The Importance of DEI Education for Pathologists and Laboratory Professionals (2024). Available online at: https://criticalvalues.org/news/all/2024/08/06/the-importance-of-dei-education-for-pathologists-and-laboratory-professionals (Accessed April 17, 2025).
53.
Department of Health and Social Care. Government Response to the Report of the Equity in Medical Devices: Independent Review (2024). Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-response-to-the-report-of-the-equity-in-medical-devices-independent-review (Accessed May 12, 2025).
54.
Martin D Johns C Sorrell L Healy E Phull M Olusanya S et al Effect of Skin Tone on the Accuracy of the Estimation of Arterial Oxygen Saturation by Pulse Oximetry: A Systematic Review. Br J Anaesth (2024) 132(5):945–56. 10.1016/j.bja.2024.01.023
55.
Weldon KL MacKay JS . On Improving the Diagnostic Value of Quantitative Medical Laboratory Tests in Conventional Practice. J Chronic Dis (1972) 25(12):683–96. 10.1016/0021-9681(72)90004-5
56.
Cox AL Mole SE . Five Questions on Improving Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in UK Bioscience Research or “How Can UK Bioscience Be Changed so that Those from Marginalised Groups Can Thrive?”. BBA Adv (2024) 5:100114. 10.1016/j.bbadva.2024.100114
57.
Asthma UK. On the Edge: How Inequality Affects People with Asthma (2023). Available online at: https://www.asthmaandlung.org.uk/sites/default/files/2023-03/auk-health-inequalities-final.pdf (Accessed on April 16, 2025).
58.
Patel M Phillips-Caesar E Boutin-Foster C . Barriers to Lifestyle Behavioral Change in Migrant South Asian Populations. J Immigrant Minor Health (2012) 14(5):774–85. 10.1007/s10903-011-9550-x
59.
Pérez-Sánchez M Immordino P Romano G Giordano A García-Gil C Morales F . Access of Migrant Women to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services: A Systematic Review. Midwifery (2024) 139:104167. 10.1016/j.midw.2024.104167
60.
McGee R Saran S Krulwich TA . Diversity in the Biomedical Research Workforce: Developing Talent. The Mount Sinai J Med (2012) 79(3):397–411. 10.1002/msj.21310
61.
National Institutes of Health (US), Office of the Director (OD), Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity (COSWD). How Does Diversity Impact Innovation in Team Science? (2024). Available online at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK606418/ (Accessed April 16, 2025).
62.
Health Research Authority. Increasing the Diversity of People Taking Part in Research (2025). Available online at: https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/best-practice/increasing-diversity-people-taking-part-research/ (Accessed April 18, 2025).
63.
Oh SS Galanter J Thakur N Pino-Yanes M Barcelo NE White MJ et al Diversity in Clinical and Biomedical Research: A Promise yet to Be Fulfilled. PLoS Med (2015) 12(12):e1001918. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001918
64.
Chen CY Kahanamoku SS Tripati A Alegado RA Morris VR Andrade K et al Systemic Racial Disparities in Funding Rates at the National Science Foundation. eLife (2022) 11:e83071. 10.7554/eLife.83071
65.
Gladstone J Schipper L Hara-Msulira T Casci T . Equity and Inclusivity in Research Funding (2023). Available online at: https://researchsupport.admin.ox.ac.uk/files/equityandinclusivityinresearchfundingpdf (Accessed May 13, 2025).
66.
Pardhan S Sehmbi T Wijewickrama R Onumajuru H Piyasena MP . Barriers and Facilitators for Engaging Underrepresented Ethnic Minority Populations in Healthcare Research: An Umbrella Review. Int J Equity Health (2025) 24(1):70. 10.1186/s12939-025-02431-4
67.
Bowman N Logel C Lacosse J Canning EA Emerson KTU Murphy MC . The Role of Minoritized Student Representation in Promoting Achievement and Equity Within College STEM Courses. AERA Open (2023) 9:23328584231209957. 10.1177/23328584231209957
68.
Llorens A Tzovara A Bellier L Bhaya-Grossman I Bidet-Caulet A Chang WK et al Gender Bias in Academia: A Lifetime Problem that Needs Solutions. Neuron (2021) 109(13):2047–74. 10.1016/j.neuron.2021.06.002
69.
Claridge H Stone K Ussher M . The Ethnicity Attainment Gap Among Medical and Biomedical Science Students: A Qualitative Study. BMC Med Education (2018) 18:325. 10.1186/s12909-018-1426-5
70.
Wilson MA DePass AL Bean AJ . Institutional Interventions that Remove Barriers to Recruit and Retain Diverse Biomedical Phd Students. CBE—Life Sci Education (2018) 17(2):ar27. 10.1187/cbe.17-09-0210
71.
Porta AR . Using Diversity Among Biomedical Scientists as a Teaching Tool a Positive Effect of Role Modeling on Minority Students. The Am Biol Teach (2002) 64(3):176–82. 10.2307/4451273
72.
Gewin V . The Time Tax Put on Scientists of Colour. Nature (2020) 583:479–81. 10.1038/d41586-020-01920-6
73.
Reddick RJ Bukoski BE Smith SL . (Cultural) Taxation Without Representation? How Educational Developers Can Broker Discourse on Black Faculty Lives in the #Blacklivesmatter Era. To Improve Acad (2020) 39(1). 10.3998/tia.17063888.0039.103
74.
Public Health England. Addressing Health Inequalities Through Collaborative Action: Briefing Note (2021). Available online at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1020977/health_inequalities_briefing.pdf (Accessed May 13, 2025).
75.
Ford J Sowden S Olivera J Bambra C Gimson A Aldridge R et al Transforming Health Systems to Reduce Health Inequalities. Future Healthc J (2021) 8(2):e204–e209. 10.7861/fhj.2021-0018
76.
Aston University. Written Evidence Submitted by Aston University (MRS0145) (2020). Available online at: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/2948/html/ (Accessed April 17, 2025).
77.
Chaturvedi A Zhu A Gadela NV Prabhakaran D Jafar TH . Social Determinants of Health and Disparities in Hypertension and Cardiovascular Diseases. Hypertension (2024) 81(3):387–99. 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.123.21354
78.
Macias-Konstantopoulos WL Collins KA Diaz R Duber HC Edwards CD Hsu AP et al Race, Healthcare, and Health Disparities: A Critical Review and Recommendations for Advancing Health Equity. West J Emerg Med (2023) 24(5):906–18. 10.5811/WESTJEM.58408
79.
Chaka A Pan D Irshad M Piranie H Wells M Lal Z et al Inclusion of Racial and Ethnic Groups in Clinical Trials for COVID-19 and Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome: An Analysis of Studies Registered on Clinicaltrials.Gov. J Infect (2024) 89(2):106207. 10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106207
80.
Xiao H Vaidya R Liu F Chang X Xia X Unger JMS . Sex, Racial, and Ethnic Representation in COVID-19 Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JAMA Intern Med (2023) 183(1):50–60. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.5600
81.
Chen AT . COVID-19 Vaccine Efforts Show Community-Led Public Health Can Address Racial Inequities (2022). Available online at: https://ssir.org/articles/entry/covid_19_vaccine_efforts_public_health (Accessed April 16, 2025).
82.
Karras J Harrison M Petrakis D Gore E Seale H . “I’D Just Love to Hear what the Community Has to Say”: Exploring the Potential of Community-Driven Vaccine Messaging Amongst Ethnic Minority Communities. Hum Vaccin and Immunother (2024) 20(1):2423469. 10.1080/21645515.2024.2423469
83.
Vanderslott S Joynes-Burgess K Kadambari S O’Dwyer E Alidu L Vandrevala T . Examining the Role of Community Champions to Promote Vaccine Uptake in Under-Served Communities in the United Kingdom: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. SSM - Qual Res Health (2024) 5:100436. 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2024.100436
84.
Harding-Edgar L McCartney M Pollock AM . Test and Trace Strategy Has Overlooked Importance of Clinical Input, Clinical Oversight and Integration. J R Soc Med (2020) 113:428–32. 10.1177/0141076820967906
85.
Catapult Medicines Discovery. Britain’s Biggest Network of Diagnostic Labs Are Completed in 5 Weeks (2020). Available online at: https://md.catapult.org.uk/news/britains-biggest-network-of-diagnostic-labs-are-completed-in-5-weeks/ (Accessed April 17, 2025).
86.
Biomedical Scientist. Shining a Light …On Lighthouse Laboratories (2021). Available online at: https://thebiomedicalscientist.net/2021/11/02/shining-light-lighthouse-laboratories (Accessed April 17, 2025).
87.
Blue Ocean Brain. The Power of Cognitively Diverse Teams (2025). Available online at: https://blog.blueoceanbrain.com/blog/the-power-of-cognitively-diverse-teams (Accessed April 16, 2025).
88.
Sundaram M Mohanakrishnan J Murugavel KG Shankar EM Solomon S Srinivas CN et al Ethnic Variation in Certain Hematological and Biochemical Reference Intervals in a South Indian Healthy Adult Population. Eur J Intern Med (2008) 19(1):46–50. 10.1016/j.ejim.2007.06.010
89.
Tahmasebi H Trajcevski K Higgins V Adeli K . Influence of Ethnicity on Population Reference Values for Biochemical Markers. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci (2018) 55(5):359–75. 10.1080/10408363.2018.1476455
90.
Tulane University. How to Improve Cultural Competence in Health Care (2021). Available online at: https://publichealth.tulane.edu/blog/cultural-competence-in-health-care/ (Accessed April 16, 2025).
91.
Khuntia J Ning X Cascio W Stacey R . Valuing Diversity and Inclusion in Health Care to Equip the Workforce: Survey Study and Pathway Analysis. JMIR Formative Res (2022) 6(5):e34808. 10.2196/34808
92.
Bevan V Learmonth M . ‘I Wouldn’T Say It’s Sexism, Except that … It’s all These Little Subtle Things’: Healthcare Scientists’ Accounts of Gender in Healthcare Science Laboratories. Social Stud Sci (2012) 43:136–58. 10.1177/0306312712460606
93.
Fleming R Berkowitz B Cheadle AD . Increasing Minority Representation in the Health Professions. J Sch Nurs (2005) 21(1):31–9. 10.1622/1059-8405(2005)021[0031:imrith]2.0.co;2
94.
Isasi F Naylor MD Skorton D Grabowski DC Hernández S Rice VM . Patients, Families, and Communities COVID-19 Impact Assessment: Lessons Learned and Compelling Needs. NAM Perspect (2021) 2021. 10.31478/202111c
95.
Jackson CS Gracia JN . Addressing Health and Health-Care Disparities: The Role of a Diverse Workforce and the Social Determinants of Health. Public Health Reports® (2014) 129(1_Suppl. 2):57–61. 10.1177/00333549141291S211
96.
Health and Care Professions Council. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. (2024). Available online at: https://www.hcpc-uk.org/standards/standards-of-conduct-performance-and-ethics/revised-standards/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/ (Accessed 20 July 2025).
Summary
Keywords
health disparities, health inequities, workforce, diversity, equity diversity and inclusion
Citation
Heath V and Price CL (2025) Addressing Health Disparities: How Having a More Diverse Biomedical Workforce Can Contribute to Addressing Health Disparities in Communities that Are Often Underrepresented in the Healthcare System. Br. J. Biomed. Sci. 82:14973. doi: 10.3389/bjbs.2025.14973
Received
28 May 2025
Accepted
11 September 2025
Published
22 September 2025
Volume
82 - 2025
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Heath and Price.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Claire L. Price, c.l.price@swansea.ac.uk
ORCID: Victoria Heath, orcid.org/0000-0003-3925-7885; Claire L. Price, orcid.org/0000-0002-6045-4835
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.