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