ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2024
A schema for coding health equity scholarship within pediatric research.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Seattle Children's Research Institute is identifying the amount and type of health equity scholarship being conducted institution wide. However, methods for categorizing how scholarship is equity-focused are lacking. We developed and evaluated the reliability of a health equity scholarship coding schema applied to Seattle Children's affiliated scholarship. Methods: A 2021-2022 Ovid MEDLINE affiliation search yielded 3551 affiliated scholarship records, with 1079 records identified via an existing filter as scholarship addressing social determinants of health. Through reliability testing and examining concordance and discordance across three independent coders of these records, we developed a coding schema to classify health equity scholarship (yes/no). When health equity scholarship proved positive/Yes, the coders assigned a one through five maturity rating of the scholarship towards addressing inequities. Subsequent reliability testing including a new coder was conducted for 992 subsequent affiliated scholarship records (Oct 2022-June 2023), with additional testing of the sensitivity and specificity of the existing filter relative to the new coding schema. Results: Reliability for identifying health equity scholarship was consistently high (Fleiss kappas ≥ .78) and categorization of health equity scholarship into maturity levels was moderate (Fleiss kappas ≥ .47). The coding schema identified additional health equity scholarship not captured in an existing filter for social determinants of health scholarship. Based on the new schema, 23.3% of Seattle Childrens' affiliated scholarship published October 2002-June 2023 was health equity focused. Conclusions: This new coding schema can be used to identify and categorize health equity scholarship to help quantitate the health equity focus of portfolios of human-focused research.
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.