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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Philipp Jaehn, Julia Rehling, Ronny Klawunn, Sibille Merz, Christine Holmberg, Gabriele Bolte, Emily Mena, Alexander Rommel, Anke-Christine Saß, Kathleen Pöge, Sarah Strasser
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