To review the literature on atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical trials published in the United States between 2000 and 2009 to examine the representation of racial and ethnic minorities in those trials and determine the extent to which investigators reported on demographic variables and performed a subanalysis. A PubMed search was performed including all clinical trials for management of AD published between 2000 and 2009. Three reviewers analyzed articles matching the search criteria. Data recorded included incorporation of demographic data at baseline and in the analysis and result interpretations. Of 645 PubMed search results, only 78 articles originated in the United States and fit the search criteria; 59.5% of these included reports of race or ethnicity. Of the studies reporting race or ethnicity, the subject population mainly included 62.1% white, 18.0% black, 6.9% Asian, and 2.0% Hispanic. Despite increasing awareness in the United States of the importance of reporting demographic data in clinical trials, there has been no significant improvement in reporting in AD clinical trials over the past 10 years. When reporting occurs, the categorization of ethnicities, methods of reporting data, and incorporation of the data into the results are lacking or flawed. In addition, aside from blacks, U.S. minorities appear to be underrepresented in AD clinical trials.
Based on data gathered from two field research projects, the author examines two key questions that underlie her process of becoming a sociologist: (1) How did I negotiate my multiple identities in the field, and (2) What am I really, ‘a spy, a shill, a go-between’ or a sociologist? Drawing from Goffman’s dramaturgical model, the author contends that much of the process of becoming a sociologist occurs within the shifting front and back regions in the field. Through a systematic examination of her ‘personal’ and ‘methodological’ field notes, the author captures these shifts from front to back and back to front, and attempts to elucidate the moral, ethical, and professional decisions that must be traversed along the way. Her aim, in other words, is to show how the identity negotiations that characterize ‘doing fieldwork’ are a key element of the process of becoming a (moral and ethical) sociologist.
Based on four and a half years of participant‐observation field research and focused interviews with men and women child care workers, the author examines the occupational processes of the entry and tenure of workers, paying particular attention to gender as it manifests in the meanings and actions involved in becoming and continuing as a child care worker. As men and women workers go about the business of becoming and being child care workers, they become active agents in the reproduction of child care as low‐wage, low‐status, women's work. Through the construction of particular gendered “accounts” and “vocabularies of motive,” workers play a key role in sustaining the status of child care as a gendered occupation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.