OBJECTIVES: Two policy statements published in pediatric journals encouraged researchers not to use race and ethnicity [R/E] to explain cohort differences without collecting and analyzing data that examine the potential underlying social mechanisms. We sought to determine if these statements had any impact on the reporting and discussion of R/E and sociodemographic markers [SM]. METHODS: Articles in three general pediatric journals between July 2002 and June 2003 were reviewed, and were compared with previously collected data from July 1999-June 2000. We recorded whether the articles documented R/E or SM, or both, in the results, and whether they discussed their significance. Researchers were surveyed to determine whether and why they collected R/E data. RESULTS: Race was reported in 156 of 228 articles (68%), but discussed in only one-third (75). Although there is wide interjournal variability, there was little change between the two periods. Seventy-two percent of respondents thought that R/E was or might be relevant to their research, and this influenced their decision to report and discuss R/E. CONCLUSIONS: Most researchers report R/E and believe it is relevant to their research. Despite policies that reject R/E as explanatory variables, most researchers do not report or discuss the underlying social mechanisms that may explain R/E differences.
OBJECTIVES: Two policy statements published in pediatric journals encouraged researchers not to use race and ethnicity [R/E] to explain cohort differences without collecting and analyzing data that examine the potential underlying social mechanisms. We sought to determine if these statements had any impact on the reporting and discussion of R/E and sociodemographic markers [SM]. METHODS: Articles in three general pediatric journals between July 2002 and June 2003 were reviewed, and were compared with previously collected data from July 1999-June 2000. We recorded whether the articles documented R/E or SM, or both, in the results, and whether they discussed their significance. Researchers were surveyed to determine whether and why they collected R/E data. RESULTS: Race was reported in 156 of 228 articles (68%), but discussed in only one-third (75). Although there is wide interjournal variability, there was little change between the two periods. Seventy-two percent of respondents thought that R/E was or might be relevant to their research, and this influenced their decision to report and discuss R/E. CONCLUSIONS: Most researchers report R/E and believe it is relevant to their research. Despite policies that reject R/E as explanatory variables, most researchers do not report or discuss the underlying social mechanisms that may explain R/E differences.
Keywords:
Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach