Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective
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...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier
2020-08-01
|
Series: | SSM: Population Health |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827320302548 |
id |
doaj-aeceecb87a4342ac8411568c045a84d0 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Philipp Jaehn Julia Rehling Ronny Klawunn Sibille Merz Christine Holmberg Gabriele Bolte Emily Mena Alexander Rommel Anke-Christine Saß Kathleen Pöge Sarah Strasser Christine Holmberg Philipp Jaehn Sibille Merz |
spellingShingle |
Philipp Jaehn Julia Rehling Ronny Klawunn Sibille Merz Christine Holmberg Gabriele Bolte Emily Mena Alexander Rommel Anke-Christine Saß Kathleen Pöge Sarah Strasser Christine Holmberg Philipp Jaehn Sibille Merz Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective SSM: Population Health Representativeness Study participation Cohort studies Social location Intersectionality |
author_facet |
Philipp Jaehn Julia Rehling Ronny Klawunn Sibille Merz Christine Holmberg Gabriele Bolte Emily Mena Alexander Rommel Anke-Christine Saß Kathleen Pöge Sarah Strasser Christine Holmberg Philipp Jaehn Sibille Merz |
author_sort |
Philipp Jaehn |
title |
Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective |
title_short |
Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective |
title_full |
Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective |
title_fullStr |
Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective |
title_full_unstemmed |
Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspective |
title_sort |
practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – a rationale for an intersectional perspective |
publisher |
Elsevier |
series |
SSM: Population Health |
issn |
2352-8273 |
publishDate |
2020-08-01 |
description |
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. |
topic |
Representativeness Study participation Cohort studies Social location Intersectionality |
url |
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827320302548 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT philippjaehn practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT juliarehling practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT ronnyklawunn practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT sibillemerz practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT christineholmberg practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT gabrielebolte practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT emilymena practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT alexanderrommel practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT ankechristinesaß practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT kathleenpoge practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT sarahstrasser practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT christineholmberg practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT philippjaehn practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective AT sibillemerz practiceofreportingsocialcharacteristicswhendescribingrepresentativenessofepidemiologicalcohortstudiesarationaleforanintersectionalperspective |
_version_ |
1724476214153838592 |
spelling |
doaj-aeceecb87a4342ac8411568c045a84d02020-11-25T03:53:52ZengElsevierSSM: Population Health2352-82732020-08-0111100617Practice of reporting social characteristics when describing representativeness of epidemiological cohort studies – A rationale for an intersectional perspectivePhilipp Jaehn0Julia Rehling1Ronny Klawunn2Sibille Merz3Christine Holmberg4Gabriele Bolte5Emily Mena6Alexander Rommel7Anke-Christine Saß8Kathleen Pöge9Sarah Strasser10Christine Holmberg11Philipp Jaehn12Sibille Merz13Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Hochstraße 15, 14770, Brandenburgan der Havel, Germany; Corresponding author.Umweltbundesamt, Corrensplatz 1, 14195, Berlin, GermanyBrandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Hochstraße 15, 14770, Brandenburgan der Havel, Germany; Hannover Medical School, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine, and Health Systems Research, - OE 5410 -, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, GermanyBrandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Hochstraße 15, 14770, Brandenburgan der Havel, GermanyBrandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Hochstraße 15, 14770, Brandenburgan der Havel, Germany; Faculty of Health Sciences, joint Faculty of the Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus – Senftenberg, the Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane and the University of Potsdam, GermanyUniversity of Bremen, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Department of Social Epidemiology, GermanyUniversity of Bremen, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Department of Social Epidemiology, GermanyRobert Koch Institute, GermanyRobert Koch Institute, GermanyRobert Koch Institute, GermanyRobert Koch Institute, GermanyBrandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, GermanyBrandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, GermanyBrandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, GermanyRepresentativeness 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.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827320302548RepresentativenessStudy participationCohort studiesSocial locationIntersectionality |