Cited by 101Medical Coding and Health InformationRace, Genetics, and SocietyRacial and Ethnic Identity Research

Discrepancies in race and ethnicity documentation: a potential barrier in identifying racial and ethnic disparities

Open access
Magaña López, M., Bevans, M., Wehrlen, L., Yang, L., Wallen, G. R.·2017·Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Data collection on race and ethnicity is critical in the assessment of racial disparities related to health. Studies comparing clinical and administrative data show discrepancies in race documentation and attribution. METHODS: Self-reported data from two studies were compared to demographics in the electronic health record (EHR) extracted from the Biomedical Translational Research Information System (BTRIS) repository. McNemar and Bhapkar analyses were conducted to quantify the agreement of ethnicity and race between self-reported and EHR data. Pearson's chi-square tests were used to explore the relationship between acculturation, length of time in the USA, country of residence, and how individuals self-reported their race. RESULTS: The sample (n = 280) was predominantly female (52.1 %), with a mean age of 47 (SD ± 13.74), mean years in the USA were 12.8 (SD ± 11.67) and the majority were born outside of the USA. (55.6 %). Those who self-identified as Hispanic (n = 208) scored a mean of 5.5 (SD ± 3.07) on the short acculturation scale (SAS) that ranges 4 to 20; lower scores indicate less acculturation. A significant difference was found between the way race is reported in the electronic medical record and self-reported data among those people who identified as Hispanic, with significant differences in the white (p < 0.0001) and other (p < 0.0001) categories. CONCLUSIONS: The misclassification of race is most frequent in those individuals who self-identified as Hispanic. As the Hispanic population in the USA continues to grow, understanding the factors that affect the way that individuals from this heterogeneous population self-report race may provide important guidance in tailoring care to address health disparities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40615-016-0283-3

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Misclassification bias was noted as a problem or potential problem in 18 of the 26 (69%) articles about the plausibility of race/ethnicity data.

    “Misclassification bias, that is, incorrect assignment, was noted as a problem or a potential problem in 18 of the 26 (69%) articles about the plausibility of race/ethnicity data.11,13,23–38”

    From The quality of social determinants data in the electronic health record: a systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes incorrect race and ethnicity data and discrepancies between self-reports and records, supporting the general concern about misclassification. Neither it nor the Discussion (page unavailable) reports a review of 26 articles or the figure of 18 articles (69%); that numerical claim is unsupported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Thirteen studies speculated that poor data quality for Hispanic patients may be due to the fluid, debatable, and problematic nature of the definition of race and ethnicity.

    “Thirteen studies speculated that this may be due to the “fluid, debatable, and problematic”34 nature of the definition of race and ethnicity.11,22,24–26,34,37,40,41,45,46,80,81”

    From The quality of social determinants data in the electronic health record: a systematic review (2021) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Introduction describes racial and ethnic identification as fluid, and the Discussion links Hispanic/Latino reporting inconsistencies to difficulty fitting existing race and ethnicity categories. The paper does not use the quoted phrase “fluid, debatable, and problematic,” so it supports the explanation but not the quotation attributed to it. The count of thirteen studies is the citing authors’ aggregation, not a finding attributed to this individual source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Fourteen studies reported that Hispanic patients were more likely to be misclassified, either that information about their ethnicity was missing or they had been mistakenly grouped into the "Other" category.

    “Fourteen studies reported that Hispanic patients were more likely to be misclassified, either that information about their ethnicity was missing or they had been mistakenly grouped into the “Other” category.11,23–25,29,30,32,33,36–41”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

11 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [3]AHRQ, A.f.H.R.a.Q., in race, ethnicity, and language data: standardization for health care quality improvement. C. Ulmer, B. McFadden, and D.R. Nerenz, Editors. 2009, 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences: Washington DC. 25032349

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Magaña López, M., Bevans, M., Wehrlen, L., Yang, L., & Wallen, G. R.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Corresponding author
Wallen, G. R.
Venue
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities
Published
2016-09-08
Volume
4
Issue
5
Pages
812-818
ISSN
  • 2196-8837 (ISSN-L)
  • 2197-3792
OpenAlex
W2509529148
Cited by
101
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
All funding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center Intramural Research Program.
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
Keywords
racial misclassification, self-reported race, electronic health records, Hispanic population, acculturation, racial disparities, health disparities, data discrepancies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review