ReviewSSM - population health2020
Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies - A rationale for an intersectional perspective.
Review in SSM - population health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reach and representativeness within a rural randomized controlled trial designed to improve community health through civic engagement for built environment change in Texas and New York.Wellbeing, space and society · 2026Article
- Interventions to address individual/household food insecurity in Europe since COVID-19: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2026Article
- What can we learn from an intersectionality-informed description of study participants? Results from the German National Cohort.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Advancing health equity in Nova Scotia by exploring gaps in healthcare delivery: a mixed methods protocol.Research in health services & regions · 2025Article
- Onset of Type 2 diabetes in adults aged 50 and older in Europe: an intersectional multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Article
- Investigating people's attitudes towards participating in longitudinal health research: an intersectionality-informed perspective.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Missing from the Narrative: A Seven-Decade Scoping Review of the Inclusion of Black Autistic Women and Girls in Autism Research.Behavior analysis in practice · 2022Article
- Sex and gender specific health topics in medical student learners: pulse check eight years later.Biology of sex differences · 2021Article
- Novel stepwise approach to assess representativeness of a large multicenter observational cohort of tuberculosis patients: The example of RePORT Brazil.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Representativeness has been defined as the degree of similarity of a study population compared to an external population. To characterize a study population, both health-related and social or demographic features should be considered according to current guidelines. However, little guidance is given on how to describe social complexity of study populations when aiming to conclude on representativeness. We argue that sociological concepts should inform characterizations of study populations in order to increase credibility of conclusions on representativeness. The concept of intersectionality suggests to conceptualize social location as a combination of characteristics such as sex/gender and ethnicity instead of focusing on each feature independently. To contextualize advantages of integrating the concept of intersectionality when investigating representativeness, we reviewed publications that described the baseline population of selected epidemiological cohort studies. Information on the applied methods to characterize the study population was extracted, as well as reported social characteristics. Nearly all reviewed studies reported descriptive statistics of the baseline population and response proportions. In most publications, study populations were characterized according to place of residence, age and sex/gender while other social characteristics were reported irregularly. Differential patterns of representativeness were revealed in analyses that stratified social characteristics by sex/gender or age. Furthermore, the included studies did not explicitly state the theoretical approach that underlay their description of the study population. Intersectionality might be particularly fruitful when applied to descriptions of representativeness, because this concept provides an understanding of social location that has been developed based on situated experiences of people at the intersection of multiple axes of social power relations. An intersectional perspective, hence, contributes to approximate social complexity of study populations and might contribute to increase validity of conclusions on representativeness of population-based studies.
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.