Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721141›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2023

Investigating people's attitudes towards participating in longitudinal health research: an intersectionality-informed perspective.

Sibille Merz, Philipp Jaehn, Tobias Pischon, Beate Fischer, Kerstin Wirkner, Stefan Rach, Kathrin Guenther, Nadia Obi, Christine Holmberg, AdvanceGender Study Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Sibille MerzInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Hochstr. 15, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany. Sibille.merz@mhb-fontane.de.
Philipp JaehnInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Hochstr. 15, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.
Tobias PischonMax-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine in the Helmholtz Association (MDC), Molecular Epidemiology Research Group, Robert-Rössle-Straße 10, 13125, Berlin, Germany.
Beate FischerUniversity of Regensburg, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Kerstin WirknerLIFE - Leipzig Research Centre for Civilization Diseases, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 27, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Stefan RachLeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Achterstraße 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany.
Kathrin GuentherLeibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Achterstraße 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany.
Nadia ObiUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20251, Hamburg, Germany.
Christine HolmbergInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Hochstr. 15, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.
AdvanceGender Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing evidence suggests that participation proportions in longitudinal health research vary according to sex/gender, age, social class, or migration status. Intersectionality scholarship purports that such social categories cannot be understood in isolation and makes visible the co-dependent nature of the social determinants of health and illness. This paper uses an intersectionality-informed approach in order to expand the understanding of why people participate in health research, and the impact of intersecting social structures and experiences on these attitudes.

methodsA sample of 80 respondents who had previously either accepted or declined an invitation to participate in the German National Cohort (NAKO) participated in our interview study. Interviews were semi-structured and contained both narrative elements and more structured probes. Data analysis proceeded in two steps: first, the entire data set was analysed thematically (separately for participants and non-participants); second, key themes were compared across self-reported sex/gender, age group and migration status to identify differences and commonalities.

resultsRespondents' attitudes towards study participation can be categorised into four themes: wanting to make a contribution, seeking personalised health information, excitement and feeling chosen, and seeking social recognition. Besides citing logistical challenges, non-participants narrated adverse experiences with or attitudes towards science and the healthcare system that deterred them from participating. A range of social experiences and cultural value systems shaped such attitudes; in particular, this includes the cultural authority of science as an arbiter of social questions, transgressing social categories and experiences of marginalisation. Care responsibilities, predominantly borne by female respondents, also impacted upon the decision to take part in NAKO. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that for participants, health research constitutes a site of distinction in the sense of making a difference and being distinct or distinguishable, whereas non-participants inhabited an orientation towards science that reflected their subjective marginalisation through science. No clear relationship can thereby be presumed between social location and a particular attitude towards study participation; rather, such attitudes transgress and challenge categorical boundaries. This challenges the understanding of particular populations as more or less disadvantaged, or as more or less inclined to participate in health research.

Indexed as

EmotionsIntersectional FrameworkData AnalysisFemaleHumansNarrationSelf Report

Identifiers

PMID36721141
PMCPMC9887766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.