Esteban Gonzalez Burchard and colleagues explore how making medical research more diverse would aid not only social justice but scientific quality and clinical effectiveness, too.

Purpose of Review We review recent community interventions to promote mental health and social equity. We define community interventions as those that involve multi-sector partnerships, emphasize community members as integral to the intervention, and/ or deliver services in community settings. We examine literature in seven topic areas: collaborative care, early psychosis, schoolbased interventions, homelessness, criminal justice, global mental health, and mental health promotion/prevention. We adapt the social-ecological model for health promotion and provide a framework for understanding the actions of community interventions. Recent Findings There are recent examples of effective interventions in each topic area. The majority of interventions focus on individual, family/interpersonal, and program/institutional social-ecological levels, with few intervening on whole communities or involving multiple non-healthcare sectors. Findings from many studies reinforce the interplay among mental health, interpersonal relationships, and social determinants of health. Summary There is evidence for the effectiveness of community interventions for improving mental health and some social outcomes across social-ecological levels. Studies indicate the importance of ongoing resources and training to maintain long-term outcomes, explicit attention to ethics and processes to foster equitable partnerships, and policy reform to support sustainable healthcare-community collaborations. Keywords Mental health (MeSH). Mental health intervention (MeSH). Community networks (MeSH). Social problems (MeSH). Community interventions (MeSH). Community-based interventions (MeSH). Social determinants of health. Mental health equity. Health disparities. Multi-sector interventions

Summary Points Health disparities persist across race/ethnicity for the majority of Healthy People 2010 health indicators. Most physicians and scientists are informed by research extrapolated from a largely homogenous population, usually White and male. A growing proportion of Americans are not fully benefiting from clinical and biomedical advances since racial and ethnic minorities make up nearly 40% of the U.S. population. Ignoring the racial/ethnic diversity of the U.S. population is a missed scientific opportunity to fully understand the factors that lead to disease or health. U.S. biomedical research and study populations must better reflect the country's changing demographics. Adequate representation of diverse populations in scientific research is imperative as a matter of social justice, economics, and science.

The Tribal Epidemiology Centers have been granted some authorities by law. An epidemiology center operated by a grantee pursuant to a grant awarded under subsection (d) shall be treated as a public health authority (as defined in section 164.501 of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation)) for purposes of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-191; 110 Stat. 1936). The Secretary shall grant to each epidemiology center described in paragraph (1) access to use of the data, data sets, monitoring systems, delivery systems, and other protected health information in the possession of the Secretary. The activities of an epidemiology center described in paragraph (1) shall be for the purposes of research and for preventing and controlling disease, injury, or disability (as those activities are described in section 164.512 of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation)), for purposes of the Health Insurance Portability and