ArticleResearch in the sociology of health care2013
Contextualizing Disparities: The Case for Comparative Research on Social Inequalities in Health.
Article in Research in the sociology of health care, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The positive impact of a care-physical activity initiative for people with a low socioeconomic status on health, quality of life and societal participation: a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Can physical activity compensate for low socioeconomic status with regard to poor self-rated health and low quality-of-life?Health and quality of life outcomes · 2019Article
- Educational inequalities in self-rated health across US states and European countries.International journal of public health · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeResearch on healthcare disparities is making important descriptive and analytical strides, and the issue of disparities has gained the attention of policymakers in the US, other nation-states, and international organizations. Still, disparities scholarship remains US-centric and too rarely takes a cross-national comparative approach to answering its questions. The US-centricity of disparities research has fostered a fixation on race and ethnicity that, although essential to understanding health disparities in the United States, has truncated the range of questions researchers investigate. In this article, we make a case for comparative research that highlights its ability to identify the institutional factors may affect disparities. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We discuss the central methodological challenges to comparative research. After describing current solutions to such problems, we use data from the World Values Survey to show the impact of key social fault lines on self-assessed health in Europe and the U.S.
findingsThe negative impact of SES on health is more generalizable across context, than the impact of race/ethnicity or gender. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Our analysis includes a limited number of countries and relies on one measure of health. ORIGINALITY/VALUE OF PAPER: The paper represents a first step in a research agenda to understand health inequalities within and across societies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.