Cited by 38Race, Genetics, and SocietyRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchMethodologies in Health Research and Practice

Uncontested categories: the use of race and ethnicity variables in nursing research

Drevdahl, Denise J., Philips, Debby A., Taylor, Janette Y.·2006·Nursing Inquiry

Abstract

Classifying human beings according to race and ethnicity may seem straightforward to some but it, in fact, belies a difficult process. No standard procedure exists for categorizing according to race and ethnicity, calling into question the variables’ use in research. This article explores the use of race and ethnicity variables in the nursing research literature. Content analysis was conducted of a sample of 337 original research studies published in Nursing Research from the years 1952, 1955, and then every 5 years through to 2000. Of the 337 research articles reviewed, 167 mentioned race, ethnicity, or their 81 code words or phrases. Out of the 167 articles, 153 used race or ethnicity to describe the study sample, and 45 of the 167 articles included race or ethnicity as an element of data analysis. Throughout the sample, there was substantial inconsistency related to race and ethnicity categorization, meanings of the terms, and use of these variables. Specificity related to conceptual assumptions, definitions, and context was missing and, as a result, data interpretation and understanding are suspect. The integrity of nursing knowledge requires that nurse researchers recognize and address the difficulties inherent in using race and ethnicity in health research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2006.00305.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The use of race as a natural category can obfuscate the environmental, social, and structural factors that contribute to health disparities and lead to the racialization of certain diseases.

    “For example, the use of race as a natural category can obfuscate the environmental, social, and structural factors that contribute to health disparities [29, 110] and lead to the racialization of certain diseases [19, 30, 37].”

    From Towards a critical race methodology in algorithmic fairness (2020) · cites this paper as [29]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 109 · Cited by 38

Authors
Drevdahl, D. J., Philips, D. A., & Taylor, J. Y.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington Tacoma (US)
  • University of Iowa (US)
Corresponding author
Drevdahl, Denise J.
Venue
Nursing Inquiry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-02-22
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
52-63
ISSN
  • 1320-7881 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1800
OpenAlex
W2102378339
Cited by
38
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nursing Inquiry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Iowa Research Online (The University of Iowa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
Keywords
race, ethnicity, nursing research, conceptual definitions, data interpretation, nursing research journals, health disparities research
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Ethnicity, Humans, Periodicals as Topic, Publishing, Research Design, Socioeconomic Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Nursing Research, Bias, Cultural Diversity, 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