Introduction Racial disparities in health care are a well-documented phenomenon in the USA. Universal insurance has been suggested as a solution to mitigate these disparities. We examined race-based disparities in the Military Health System (MHS) by constructing and analyzing a framework of existing studies that measured disparities between direct care (care provided by military treatment facilities) and private sector care (care provided by civilian health care facilities). Materials and Methods We conducted a framework synthesis on 77 manuscripts published in partnership with the Comparative Effectiveness and Provider-Induced Demand Collaboration Project that use MHS electronic health record data to present an overview of racial disparities assessed for multiple treatment interventions in a nationally representative, universally insured population. Results We identified 32 studies assessing racial disparities in areas of surgery, trauma, opioid prescription and usage, women’s health, and others. Racial disparities were mitigated in postoperative complications, trauma care, and cancer screenings but persisted in diabetes readmissions, opioid usage, and minimally invasive women’s health procedures. Conclusion Universal coverage mitigates many, but not all, racial disparities in health care. An examination of a broader range of interventions, a closer look at variation in care provided by civilian facilities, and a look at the quality of care by race provide further opportunities for research.

Objectives To examine the military-civilian collaborative efforts which addressed the unprecedented challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in areas including provision of supplies, patient and provider support, and development and dissemination of new vaccine and drug candidates. Methods We examined peer reviewed and grey literature from September 2020 to June 2021 to describe the relationship between the U.S. healthcare system and Military Health System (MHS). For analysis, we applied the World Health Organization framework for health systems, which consists of six building blocks. Results The strongest collaborative efforts occurred in areas of medicine and technology, human resources, and healthcare delivery, most notably in the MHS supplying providers, setting up treatment venues, and participating in development of vaccines and therapeutics. Highlighting that the MHS, with its centralized structure and ability to deploy assets rapidly, is an important contributor to the nation’s ability to provide a coordinated, large-scale response to health emergencies. Conclusions Continuing the relationship between the two health systems is vital to maintaining the nation’s capability to meet future health challenges.