Luthra, A, Wessely, S · Social science & medicine (1982) · 2004 · DOI
This study examines how ME/CFS and its historical predecessor neurasthenia have been discussed in terms of race and ethnicity over the past century. The authors found that there is a pattern of thinking that associates fatigue illnesses with technological 'development' in white countries, and they explore why far fewer non-white patients appear in specialist ME/CFS clinics compared to what you might expect from the general population.
This work highlights important disparities in ME/CFS diagnosis and specialist care access based on race and ethnicity, raising awareness about potential biases in how the disease is recognized and researched. Understanding these historical and social patterns is essential for ensuring equitable diagnosis and treatment across all populations affected by ME/CFS.
This study does not establish causation for health disparities, nor does it provide quantitative data on actual prevalence rates of ME/CFS by ethnicity. It is primarily a critical historical and social analysis rather than an empirical epidemiological study, so it cannot definitively prove mechanisms behind underrepresentation in clinics.
About the PEM badge: “PEM required” means post-exertional malaise was an explicit required diagnostic criterion for participant inclusion in this study — not that PEM was studied, observed, or discussed. Studies using criteria that do not require PEM (e.g. Fukuda, Oxford) are tagged “PEM not required”. How the atlas works →
Spotted an error in this entry? Report it →