美女免费一级视频在线观看

Note from author: The opinions are my own and not on behalf of Bristol Myers Squibb. 

In the context of healthcare in the U.S., the term “Asian” is often treated as a single, homogenous category.

For South Asians (e.g., people of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nepali and Sri Lankan descent), this broad demographic grouping erases meaningful differences that directly affect health outcomes and access to care.

For example, South Asians face elevated risks for conditions such as Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, often at lower body mass indexes than other populations. Yet when lumped into aggregated “Asian” data, these patterns vanish under the statistical weight of East Asian health trends. This makes it harder to tailor clinical trial recruitment, screenings and educational campaigns to the specific needs of South Asian communities.

The miscategorization goes beyond medical metrics. Socio-economic assumptions like the “model minority” myth obscure the fact that South Asians in the U.S. include both high-income professionals and recent immigrants working low-wage jobs with limited English proficiency.

Pharma messaging often assumes English fluency, high health literacy and digital access, missing those who need the most targeted interventions. Cultural norms around illness disclosure, gender roles in healthcare decision-making, and stigma around certain conditions can further complicate outreach if not specifically addressed.

These challenges may sound theoretical, but they pose real-world consequences such as underrepresentation in research, delayed diagnoses and poor access and adherence to treatment. If that’s not compelling enough, know that the South Asian community isn’t alone. Middle Eastern, Afro-Caribbean and Indigenous communities — among others — are also included in overly-broad census categories that both flatten diversity and mask health disparities.

For pharma marketers, the solution starts with rethinking how we approach data disaggregation in relation to market research, audience segmentation, and perhaps even media buying.

Industry veterans might immediately wonder what an overhaul of these standards would entail (and at what cost), but the reality is that the shift happens on a much more personal level. As strategy and communication experts, the evolution begins with being more intentional in how we see and speak about others (i.e. moving beyond “Asian” as a convenient catch-all).

In an ideal world, we would achieve real impact by extending this thinking to HCPs and how they interact with and treat diverse groups of patients, and how we can provide HCPs with support in turn. This mindset can be further reinforced through education in culturally-nuanced communication and by building ongoing partnerships with trusted community organizations that can help both surface and dismantle barriers to care. 

Coupled with the latest tech-enabled efficiencies in gathering insights, targeting audiences, and even creating and deploying content, it would seem the biggest hurdle in making invisible groups visible within healthcare is acknowledging their value and validating their challenges in the first place. When considering bottom-line impact, steps toward specificity may not only improve patient outcomes, but also bring us closer to truly effective one-on-one messaging; not just reaching the right person at the right time, but also in the right way.

If we want to achieve more meaningful, life-changing engagement and build toward more equitable healthcare, we need to resist simplifying identities by checking convenient boxes, because ultimately, precision in understanding people is as vital as precision in medicine.