Describing Ethnicity in Health Research

Abstract

Commentators have criticised the terminology used for the classification of ethnic and racialised groups in health research for a number of years. The shortcomings of fixed-response categories include the reproduction of racialised categorisations, overemphasis of homogeneity within groups and contrast between them, and failure to offer terms with which people identify and which can express complex identities. The historical injustices against black and minority groups are reflected in terminology and explicitly recognised when discussing 'race' as a social construction. The exaggeration of homogeneity within groups and contrast between them is a racialising effect of fixed classifications. Self-assigned ethnic group avoids some of these difficulties by allowing multiple affiliations to be described, but introduces the costs of processing free text. The context-dependent nature of individual ethnic identity makes comparison problematic. Researcher-assigned ethnicity can increase comparability and consistency but may be at odds with self-identity. The complexity of ethnicity itself and of its relationship with socio-economic group and racism makes proxy measures inevitably inadequate. If researchers continue to try to capture the complex and contextual detail of ethnicity, it may become clear that the general concept of ethnicity covers such a wide and specific range of experiences as to render it of limited use in making comparisons through time or across cultures.

Decision-Making and Ante-Natal Screening for Sickle Cell and Thalassaemia Disorders

“…Religious identity is a notoriously difficult concept to define (see Bradby, 2003), although in some ways the multi-faceted way in which it is known to us has many advantages. If nothing else, it reminds us of the complex and shifting nature of religious identity, as it comes to reflect an ongoing dialogue between culture, nationality and a shared heritage, in addition to religious belief (Modood et al, 1997).…”

The human dimensions of post-stroke homecare: experiences of older carers from diverse ethnic groups

“…The relatively small numbers of carers in the five ethnic groups may have obscured some of the diversity and heterogeneity that exists within each of these ethnic groups [67]. The study focused on carers from BME groups and did not explore other important ethnic groups within the populations covered by super-diversity [68], for example minority groups from Eastern European and Latin American countries.…”

Can the quality of social research on ethnicity be improved through the introduction of guidance? Findings from a research commissioning pilot exercise

“…Common criticisms include: the lack of conceptual clarity and failure to carefully articulate and justify approaches to measuring ethnicity (Ballard, 1997); inappropriate representation of ethnic groups as stable, discrete entities (Bradby, 2003;Aspinall and Chinouya, 2008;Zuberi and Bonilla-Silva, 2008); and inadequate engagement with the multidimensional nature of ethnicity (Burton, Nandi and Platt, 2010;Kaufman, Cooper and McGee, 1997). Other commentators have drawn attention to the need for greater consideration of how samples are drawn and participants recruited (Ellison, 2005;Nazroo, 2006;Epstein, 2008) as well as how data are generated from diverse samples, including issues of translation and cross-cultural validity (Chattoo and Atkin, 2006).…”