ReviewJournal of the Royal Society of New Zealand2025
Unpacking tick-boxes: considerations and recommendations for collecting, analysing, and interpreting ethnicity data.
Review in Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increasing Underrepresentation of Pacific Peoples in Community-Based Respiratory Surveillance in Aotearoa New Zealand, 2018-2024.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2026Article
- Continuity of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in States With and Without Medicaid Prescription Cap Policies.Medical care · 2026Article
- Public Attitudes to Responding to Global Catastrophic Risks: A New Zealand Case Study.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2025Article
- Comment on 'Unpacking tick-boxes: considerations and recommendations for collecting, analysing, and interpreting ethnicity data'.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ethnicity is an important variable in health and social science research, but working quantitatively with ethnicity data is complex because the construct is multifaceted, fluid, subjective, and political in nature. This necessitates careful consideration within the context of, and issues related to, the collection and classification of ethnicity data. Researchers' methodological decisions regarding ethnicity data can impact substantive research outcomes and implications for policy and practice. This critical review provides an overview of the conceptualisation and sociohistorical context of ethnicity, followed by a thorough discussion of the methodological issues in the collection and analysis of ethnicity data with a focus on the Aotearoa New Zealand context. It then offers comprehensive guidance and recommendations for quantitative researchers. With an emphasis on researcher criticality, reflexivity, and the importance of upholding the data sovereignty of Indigenous and minoritised ethnic groups, this review equips data users with the information needed to conduct ethical, equitable, robust, and scientifically-informed research involving ethnicity.
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.