Re-examining the utility and validity of benign ethnic neutropenia: A narrative literature review.

Abstract

To conduct a narrative literature review of published evidence documenting racial differences in white blood cells (WBCs) resulting in the legitimization of benign ethnic neutropenia (BEN) as a diagnosis. A search of English-language U.S.-based articles was undertaken using the following electronic databases: Medline (1860 to 1990); PsycINFO (1860 to 1990); and EMBASE (1860 to 1990), which resulted in a total of eight studies. A narrative literature review of the eight studies was conducted to assess how race was utilized in the study methods. Of the eight studies, several themes emerged within the scientific literature that demonstrate imprecise, problematic use of race in research practice. 1) Researchers embedded flawed notions of biological differences between racial groups (mostly focused on Black people compared to white people) within the research hypotheses, methods, and conclusions, 2) studies were unclear on how racial group membership was defined and identified within the study samples, 3) studies did not adequately account for structural or historical determinants of health that may drive racial differences in immune status (i.e., neutropenia). Given the limitations in this U.S.-based scientific literature, BEN is a diagnosis of limited construct validity that reinforces false notions of biological race, warrants renaming to remove "ethnic" language (to include "familial" or "hereditary"), and suggests a need for global expansion of the existing absolute neutrophil count reference ranges in the clozapine monitoring guidelines.