Abstract
Depression among Black women is a significant public health concern. However, our understanding of their unique experiences and the barriers and facilitators to utilising healthcare services remains limited. To address these issues, we conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis in collaboration with experts by lived experiences. We searched seven databases (ASSIA, MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts, CINAHL, AMED and EMBASE) from inception to 9th September 2021 and updated to 29th March 2024 with an English language restriction. Study quality and confidence in findings were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. Of 15025 papers screened, 45 were eligible for inclusion. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Women reported depression stemming from racial and gender-related stressors, social isolation, and a loss of faith; moreover, the ‘Strong Black Woman’ schema masked depression symptoms. Mistrust of healthcare providers, stigma, religious coping, and pressure to conform to the Strong Black Woman schema hindered healthcare service utilisation. The rapport between women and their healthcare providers, endorsement from faith leaders, and points of crisis enabled service utilisation. Lived experience experts provided reflections and recommendations for practice.
Highlights
Recognition of depression may be hampered by schemas connected to Black women’s identity.
Trust between Black women experiencing depression and clinicians is essential for effective care.
Training which incorporates antiracist principles is needed for competence in discussing issues surrounding race and gender.
(Re-)consideration of diagnostic criteria to acknowledge differential presentation and the development of culturally adapted treatments are warranted.
Co-producing research with experts by lived experience ensures it is more impactful.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The Economic Social Research Council funded AJ via the London Interdisciplinary Social Science Doctoral Training Partnership. Grant award number: ES/P000703/1 PR: 2462475. The PPIE activities were funded by the Centre of Public Engagement at Queen Mary University of London and the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaborative (ARC) North Thames through grants held by AJ
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This is a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis, so we used data from published papers. The papers are cited and referenced. Therefore, data can be accessed from them.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.
