ArticlePloS one2024
Intersectionality and benefit receipt: The interplay between education, gender, age and migration background.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines differences in benefit receipt using an intersectional approach. Intersectionality theory emphasizes the importance of the interplay of multiple social dimensions. Taking this as a starting point, the paper investigates how different combinations of three demographic variables plus education buffer or amplify benefit receipt and thereby create relatively advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Administrative data were used, sourced from Dutch registers that provide accurate and detailed information on benefit receipt for the entire Dutch population, including small and hard-to-reach segments. Multilevel Analyses of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (MAIHDA) are performed to assess which intersectional groups are relatively advantaged or disadvantaged with respect to benefit receipt. Intersectional group differences are more pronounced for social assistance than for unemployment insurance. Complex combinations of education, gender, age and migration background are required to better understand differences in benefit receipt, especially for unemployment insurance.
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.