Lexi Harari1, Chioun Lee2. 1. Department of Sociology, University of California-Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA. 2. Department of Sociology, University of California-Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA. Electronic address: chiounl@ucr.edu.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Quantitative health disparities research has increasingly employed intersectionality as a theoretical tool to investigate how social characteristics intersect to generate health inequality. Yet, intersectionality was not designed to quantify, predict, or identify health disparities, and, as a result, multiple criticisms against its misapplication in health disparities research have been made. As such, there is an emerging need to evaluate the growing body of quantitative research that aims to investigate health disparities through an intersectional lens. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review from earliest records to January 2020 to (i) describe the scope of limitations when applying intersectionality to quantitative health disparities research, and (ii) identify recommendations to improve the future integration of intersectionality with this scholarship. We identified relevant publications with electronic searches in PubMed and CA Web of Science. Studies eligible for inclusion were English-language publications that used quantitative methodologies to investigate health disparities among adults in the U.S. while explicitly claiming to adopt an intersectional perspective. Out of 1279 articles reviewed, 65 were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Our review found that, while the value of intersectionality to the study of health disparities is evident, the existing research struggles with meeting intersectionality's fundamental assumptions. In particular, four limitations were found to be widespread: narrowing the measurements of intersectionality, intersectional groups, and health outcomes; placing primacy on the study of certain intersectional groups to the neglect of others; overlooking underlying explanatory mechanisms that contribute to the health disparities experienced by intersectional groups; and, lacking in the use of life-course perspectives to show how health disparities vary across different life stages. CONCLUSION: If the goal of health equality is to be achieved among diverse intersectional groups, future research must be assisted by the collection and examination of data that overcomes these limitations.
RATIONALE: Quantitative health disparities research has increasingly employed intersectionality as a theoretical tool to investigate how social characteristics intersect to generate health inequality. Yet, intersectionality was not designed to quantify, predict, or identify health disparities, and, as a result, multiple criticisms against its misapplication in health disparities research have been made. As such, there is an emerging need to evaluate the growing body of quantitative research that aims to investigate health disparities through an intersectional lens. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review from earliest records to January 2020 to (i) describe the scope of limitations when applying intersectionality to quantitative health disparities research, and (ii) identify recommendations to improve the future integration of intersectionality with this scholarship. We identified relevant publications with electronic searches in PubMed and CA Web of Science. Studies eligible for inclusion were English-language publications that used quantitative methodologies to investigate health disparities among adults in the U.S. while explicitly claiming to adopt an intersectional perspective. Out of 1279 articles reviewed, 65 were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Our review found that, while the value of intersectionality to the study of health disparities is evident, the existing research struggles with meeting intersectionality's fundamental assumptions. In particular, four limitations were found to be widespread: narrowing the measurements of intersectionality, intersectional groups, and health outcomes; placing primacy on the study of certain intersectional groups to the neglect of others; overlooking underlying explanatory mechanisms that contribute to the health disparities experienced by intersectional groups; and, lacking in the use of life-course perspectives to show how health disparities vary across different life stages. CONCLUSION: If the goal of health equality is to be achieved among diverse intersectional groups, future research must be assisted by the collection and examination of data that overcomes these limitations.
Keywords:
Gender; Health disparities; Health equity; Intersectionality; Quantitative methods; Race/ethnicity; Social determinants of health; Socioeconomic status
Authors: Janet E Jones; Sarah L Damery; Katherine Phillips; Ameeta Retzer; Pamela Nayyar; Kate Jolly Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Constanza Jacques-Aviñó; Tomàs López-Jiménez; Matthew Bennett; Laura Medina-Perucha; Brenda Biaani León-Gómez; Anna Berenguera Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-06-16