Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21054368›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2010

Data and measurement issues in the analysis of health disparities.

Linda T Bilheimer, Richard J Klein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Autoimmune Health Crisis: An Inclusive Approach to Addressing Disparities in Women in the United States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Linda T BilheimerOffice of Analysis and Epidemiology, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 3311 Toledo Rd, Hyattsville, MD 20782, USA. lbilheimer@cdc.gov
Richard J Klein

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe measurement challenges and strategies in identifying and analyzing health disparities and inequities.

methodsWe discuss the limitations of existing data sources for measuring health disparities and inequities, describe current strategies to address those limitations, and explore the potential of emerging strategies. PRINCIPAL

findingsLarger national sample sizes are necessary to identify disparities for major population subgroups. Collecting self-reported race and granular ethnicity data may reduce some measurement errors, but it raises other methodological questions. The assessment of health inequities presents particular challenges, requiring analysis of the interactive effects of multiple determinants of health. Indirect estimation and modeling methods are likely to be important tools for estimating health disparities and inequities for the foreseeable future.

conclusionsInterdisciplinary training and collaborative research models will be essential for future disparities research. Evaluation of evolving methodologies for assessing health disparities should be a priority for health services researchers in the next decade.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesBiasData Interpretation, StatisticalDemographyEthnicityHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Services ResearchHumansRacial GroupsSample SizeStatistics as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID21054368
PMCPMC2965888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.