TY - JOUR
T1 - Reporting of equity in observational epidemiology
T2 - A methodological review
AU - Dewidar, Omar
AU - Al-Zubaidi, Ali
AU - Bondok, Mostafa
AU - Abdelrazeq, Leenah
AU - Huang, Jimmy
AU - Jearvis, Alyssa
AU - Barker, Lucy C.
AU - Elmestekawy, Nour
AU - Goghomu, Elizabeth
AU - Rader, Tamara
AU - Tufte, Janice
AU - Greer-Smith, Regina
AU - Waddington, Hugh S.
AU - Nicholls, Stuart G.
AU - Little, Julian
AU - Hardy, Billie Jo
AU - Horsley, Tanya
AU - Young, Taryn
AU - Cuervo, Luis Gabriel
AU - Sharp, Melissa K.
AU - Chamberlain, Catherine
AU - Shea, Beverley
AU - Craig, Peter
AU - Lawson, Daeria O.
AU - Rizvi, Anita
AU - Wiysonge, Charles S.
AU - Kredo, Tamara
AU - Francis, Damian
AU - Kristjansson, Elizabeth
AU - Bhutta, Zulfiqar
AU - Antequera, Alba
AU - Melendez-Torres, G. J.
AU - Pantoja, Tomas
AU - Wang, Xiaoqin
AU - Jull, Janet
AU - Roberts, Janet Hatcher
AU - Funnell, Sarah
AU - White, Howard
AU - Krentel, Alison
AU - Mahande, Michael Johnson
AU - Ramke, Jacqueline
AU - Wells, George
AU - Petkovic, Jennifer
AU - Pottie, Kevin
AU - Niba, Loveline
AU - Feng, Cindy
AU - Nguliefem, Miriam N.
AU - Tugwell, Peter
AU - Mbuagbaw, Lawrence
AU - Welch, Vivian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Background Observational studies can inform how we understand and address persisting health inequities through the collection, reporting and analysis of health equity factors. However, the extent to which the analysis and reporting of equity-relevant aspects in observational research are generally unknown. Thus, we aimed to systematically evaluate how equity-relevant observational studies reported equity considerations in the study design and analyses. Methods We searched MEDLINE for health equity-relevant observational studies from January 2020 to March 2022, resulting in 16828 articles. We randomly selected 320 studies, ensuring a balance in focus on populations experiencing inequities, country income settings, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) topic. We extracted information on study design and analysis methods. Results The bulk of the studies were conducted in North America (n=95, 30%), followed by Europe and Central Asia (n=55, 17%). Half of the studies (n=171, 53%) addressed general health and well-being, while 49 (15%) focused on mental health conditions. Two-thirds of the studies (n=220, 69%) were cross-sectional. Eight (3%) engaged with populations experiencing inequities, while 22 (29%) adapted recruitment methods to reach these populations. Further, 67 studies (21%) examined interaction effects primarily related to race or ethnicity (48%). Two-thirds of the studies (72%) adjusted for characteristics associated with inequities, and 18 studies (6%) used flow diagrams to depict how populations experiencing inequities progressed throughout the studies. Conclusions Despite over 80% of the equity-focused observational studies providing a rationale for a focus on health equity, reporting of study design features relevant to health equity ranged from 0–95%, with over half of the items reported by less than one-quarter of studies. This methodological study is a baseline assessment to inform the development of an equity-focussed reporting guideline for observational studies as an extension of the well-known Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline.
AB - Background Observational studies can inform how we understand and address persisting health inequities through the collection, reporting and analysis of health equity factors. However, the extent to which the analysis and reporting of equity-relevant aspects in observational research are generally unknown. Thus, we aimed to systematically evaluate how equity-relevant observational studies reported equity considerations in the study design and analyses. Methods We searched MEDLINE for health equity-relevant observational studies from January 2020 to March 2022, resulting in 16828 articles. We randomly selected 320 studies, ensuring a balance in focus on populations experiencing inequities, country income settings, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) topic. We extracted information on study design and analysis methods. Results The bulk of the studies were conducted in North America (n=95, 30%), followed by Europe and Central Asia (n=55, 17%). Half of the studies (n=171, 53%) addressed general health and well-being, while 49 (15%) focused on mental health conditions. Two-thirds of the studies (n=220, 69%) were cross-sectional. Eight (3%) engaged with populations experiencing inequities, while 22 (29%) adapted recruitment methods to reach these populations. Further, 67 studies (21%) examined interaction effects primarily related to race or ethnicity (48%). Two-thirds of the studies (72%) adjusted for characteristics associated with inequities, and 18 studies (6%) used flow diagrams to depict how populations experiencing inequities progressed throughout the studies. Conclusions Despite over 80% of the equity-focused observational studies providing a rationale for a focus on health equity, reporting of study design features relevant to health equity ranged from 0–95%, with over half of the items reported by less than one-quarter of studies. This methodological study is a baseline assessment to inform the development of an equity-focussed reporting guideline for observational studies as an extension of the well-known Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85188200488&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.7189/JOGH.14.04046
DO - 10.7189/JOGH.14.04046
M3 - Article
C2 - 38491911
AN - SCOPUS:85188200488
SN - 2047-2978
VL - 14
JO - Journal of Global Health
JF - Journal of Global Health
M1 - 04046
ER -