A Comparison of Methods for Classifying and Modeling Respondents Who Endorse Multiple Racial/Ethnic Categories: A Health Care Experience Application
Abstract
Background: Race/ethnicity information is vital for measuring disparities across groups, and self-report is the gold standard. Many surveys assign simplified race/ethnicity based on responses to separate questions about Hispanic ethnicity and race and instruct respondents to “check all that apply.” When multiple races are endorsed, standard classification methods either create a single heterogenous multiracial group, or attempt to impute the single choice that would have been selected had only one choice been allowed. Objectives: To compare 3 options for classifying race/ethnicity: (a) hierarchical, classifying Hispanics as such regardless of racial identification, and grouping together all non-Hispanic multiracial individuals; (b) a newly proposed additive model, retaining all original endorsements plus a multiracial indicator; (c) an all-combinations approach, separately categorizing every observed combination of endorsements. Research Design: Cross-sectional comparison of racial/ethnic distributions of patient experience scores; using weighted linear regression, we model patient experience by race/ethnicity using 3 classification systems. Subjects: In total, 259,763 Medicare beneficiaries age 65+ who responded to the 2017 Medicare Consumer Assessments of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey and reported race/ethnicity. Measures: Self-reported race/ethnicity, 4 patient experience measures. Results: Additive and hierarchical models produce similar classifications for non-Hispanic single-race respondents, but differ for Hispanic and multiracial respondents. Relative to the gold standard of the all-combinations model, the additive model better captures ratings of health care experiences and response tendencies that differ by race/ethnicity than does the hierarchical model. Differences between models are smaller with more specific measures. Conclusions: Additive models of race/ethnicity may afford more useful measures of disparities in health care and other domains. Our results have particular relevance for populations with a higher prevalence of multiracial identification.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Past efforts have reduced multi-race populations to a single category by assigning them to the largest or smallest group they belong to, asking which one race the person most identifies with, or grouping all multi-race individuals into a single category.
“Efforts in the past have reduced multi-race populations to a single category by assigning them to either the largest or smallest group they belong to, asking which one race the person most identifies with, or grouping all multi-race individuals into a single category (e.g., two or more races) [52, 53].”
From Prevalence of cardiovascular disease among Asian, Pacific Islander and multi-race populations in Hawai’i and California (2023) · cites this paper as [52]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Waitzfelder, B., Palaniappan, L., Varga, A., Frankland, T. B., Li, J., Daida, Y. G., Kaholokula, J. K., Bacong, A. M., Rawlings, A. M., Chung, S., et al. (2023) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-15795-5 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Klein, D. J., Elliott, M. N., Haviland, A. M., Morrison, P. A., Orr, N., Gaillot, S., & Weech-Maldonado, R.
- Affiliations
- RAND Corporation (US)
- Morrison & Associates Inc., Nantucket, MA
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (US)
- University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
- Corresponding author
- Klein, David J.
- Elliott, Marc N.
- Orr, Nate
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2019-06
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- e34-e41
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2901808215
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 2.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
- Keywords
- Hispanic origin, hierarchical classification, patient experience, health care disparities, Medicare beneficiaries, racial and ethnic disparities
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Medicare, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Racial Groups
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