The multiplicity and situationality of enacting ‘ethnicity’ in Dutch health research articles

Abstract

Previous research has problematised the diversity of conceptualisations and operationalisations of ethnicity within health research and the field of Ethnicity and Health. In this article, we explore how practices in health research and the field of Ethnicity and Health themselves contribute to the enactment of different versions of ethnicity. Using a qualitative content analysis of contemporary peer-reviewed Dutch biomedical and health research, we identified various dynamics in research practices and the research situation, which are relevant to understanding the enactment of multiple versions of ethnicity and specific ethnic and racial categories in health research in the Netherlands. Specifically, we discuss the production of academic publications and the manner in which researchers must establish the premises for ethnicity-specific health research; the organisation and ethnic and racial labelling of the data; and the discussion of new research findings in comparison with previous ethnicity-specific research. Ultimately, our analysis illustrates that, in health research and publications, ethnicity and its relation to health are not simply discovered or found; rather we discuss how the manner in which ethnicity and specific categories of ethnicity are enacted is contingent upon these everyday dynamics of research practices and the specific research situation in which research takes place.

Maternal characteristics as indications for routine induction of labor: A nationwide retrospective cohort study

“…Like ethnicity, SES categories are also socially constructed 49 . Caution should be taken when using ethnic or SES categories in research and practice as biogenetic determinants of health outcomes 34,50 . To be able to use ethnicity and SES in a more meaningful way as a social determinant in future research, underlying categories should be registered 34 .…”

“…49 Caution should be taken when using ethnic or SES categories in research and practice as biogenetic determinants of health outcomes. 34,50 To be able to use ethnicity and SES in a more meaningful way as a social determinant in future research, underlying categories should be registered. 34 Fourth, because the moment of fetal and neonatal death was not registered, we used moment of birth as inclusion criterion, assuming fetal death and birth occurred, at most, a few days apart.…”

Towards a critical race methodology in algorithmic fairness

“…. Finally, bioinformatics tools and research practices themselves contribute to the essentialization of race [10,42,43,51]. There has also been significant debate about the appropriate use of racial variables in studies aimed at identifying causal effects [46,54,55,58,67].…”

“…Genetic ancestry testing has been criticized for its potential to promote biological essentialilsm and reinforce race privilege amongst those already experiencing it [15,98]. Finally, bioinformatics tools and research practices themselves contribute to the essentialization of race [10,42,43,51].…”

Is Superdiversity a Useful Concept in European Medical Sociology?

“…Ethnic terminology and understandings of diversity have themselves suffered from racialization, promoted by the different meanings in American versus European settings, combined with a definitional vagueness in research and clinical writing (Bradby, 2003). Qualitative research which might employ subtle categorizations in its original language is subsequently published in English-language journals and translated into recognizable, shared Anglophone categories (Helberg-Proctor et al, 2016) which may reinscribe crude racialized divisions. This paper examines the concept of superdiversity as proposed by Vertovec (2007) and developed by Meissner and Vertovec (2014) and asks what it might offer critical studies of illness, health, and healthcare.…”