Opportunities for incorporating intersectionality into biomedical informatics

IF 4 2区 医学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Oliver J. Bear Don't Walk IV , Amandalynne Paullada , Avery Everhart , Reggie Casanova-Perez , Trevor Cohen , Tiffany Veinot
{"title":"Opportunities for incorporating intersectionality into biomedical informatics","authors":"Oliver J. Bear Don't Walk IV ,&nbsp;Amandalynne Paullada ,&nbsp;Avery Everhart ,&nbsp;Reggie Casanova-Perez ,&nbsp;Trevor Cohen ,&nbsp;Tiffany Veinot","doi":"10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Many approaches in biomedical informatics (BMI) rely on the ability to define, gather, and manipulate biomedical data to support health through a cyclical research-practice lifecycle. Researchers within this field are often fortunate to work closely with healthcare and public health systems to influence data generation and capture and have access to a vast amount of biomedical data. Many informaticists also have the expertise to engage with stakeholders, develop new methods and applications, and influence policy. However, research and policy that explicitly seeks to address the systemic drivers of health would more effectively support health. Intersectionality is a theoretical framework that can facilitate such research. It holds that individual human experiences reflect larger socio-structural level systems of privilege and oppression, and cannot be truly understood if these systems are examined in isolation. Intersectionality explicitly accounts for the interrelated nature of systems of privilege and oppression, providing a lens through which to examine and challenge inequities. In this paper, we propose intersectionality as an intervention into how we conduct BMI research. We begin by discussing intersectionality’s history and core principles as they apply to BMI. We then elaborate on the potential for intersectionality to stimulate BMI research. Specifically, we posit that our efforts in BMI to improve health should address intersectionality’s five key considerations: (1) systems of privilege and oppression that shape health; (2) the interrelated nature of upstream health drivers; (3) the nuances of health outcomes within groups; (4) the problematic and power-laden nature of categories that we assign to people in research and in society; and (5) research to inform and support social change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15263,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","volume":"154 ","pages":"Article 104653"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046424000716","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many approaches in biomedical informatics (BMI) rely on the ability to define, gather, and manipulate biomedical data to support health through a cyclical research-practice lifecycle. Researchers within this field are often fortunate to work closely with healthcare and public health systems to influence data generation and capture and have access to a vast amount of biomedical data. Many informaticists also have the expertise to engage with stakeholders, develop new methods and applications, and influence policy. However, research and policy that explicitly seeks to address the systemic drivers of health would more effectively support health. Intersectionality is a theoretical framework that can facilitate such research. It holds that individual human experiences reflect larger socio-structural level systems of privilege and oppression, and cannot be truly understood if these systems are examined in isolation. Intersectionality explicitly accounts for the interrelated nature of systems of privilege and oppression, providing a lens through which to examine and challenge inequities. In this paper, we propose intersectionality as an intervention into how we conduct BMI research. We begin by discussing intersectionality’s history and core principles as they apply to BMI. We then elaborate on the potential for intersectionality to stimulate BMI research. Specifically, we posit that our efforts in BMI to improve health should address intersectionality’s five key considerations: (1) systems of privilege and oppression that shape health; (2) the interrelated nature of upstream health drivers; (3) the nuances of health outcomes within groups; (4) the problematic and power-laden nature of categories that we assign to people in research and in society; and (5) research to inform and support social change.

Abstract Image

将交叉性纳入生物医学信息学的机遇。
生物医学信息学(BMI)的许多方法都依赖于定义、收集和处理生物医学数据的能力,以便通过研究与实践的循环生命周期为健康提供支持。该领域的研究人员通常有幸与医疗保健和公共卫生系统密切合作,以影响数据的生成和捕获,并能获取大量生物医学数据。许多信息学家还拥有与利益相关者合作、开发新方法和应用以及影响政策的专业知识。然而,明确寻求解决健康的系统性驱动因素的研究和政策将更有效地支持健康。交叉性是一个可以促进此类研究的理论框架。它认为,人类的个人经历反映了特权和压迫等更大的社会结构层面的系统,如果孤立地研究这些系统,就无法真正理解这些经历。交叉性明确说明了特权和压迫体系的相互关联性,为研究和挑战不平等提供了一个视角。在本文中,我们建议将交叉性作为对如何开展 BMI 研究的一种干预。我们首先讨论交叉性的历史和核心原则,因为它们适用于 BMI。然后,我们阐述了交叉性在促进 BMI 研究方面的潜力。具体来说,我们认为,我们在 BMI 方面为改善健康所做的努力应考虑到交叉性的五个关键因素:1)影响健康的特权和压迫体系;2)上游健康驱动因素的相互关联性;3)群体内健康结果的细微差别;4)我们在研究和社会中对人的分类存在问题和权力色彩;5)研究为社会变革提供信息和支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Journal of Biomedical Informatics 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
243
审稿时长
32 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomedical Informatics reflects a commitment to high-quality original research papers, reviews, and commentaries in the area of biomedical informatics methodology. Although we publish articles motivated by applications in the biomedical sciences (for example, clinical medicine, health care, population health, and translational bioinformatics), the journal emphasizes reports of new methodologies and techniques that have general applicability and that form the basis for the evolving science of biomedical informatics. Articles on medical devices; evaluations of implemented systems (including clinical trials of information technologies); or papers that provide insight into a biological process, a specific disease, or treatment options would generally be more suitable for publication in other venues. Papers on applications of signal processing and image analysis are often more suitable for biomedical engineering journals or other informatics journals, although we do publish papers that emphasize the information management and knowledge representation/modeling issues that arise in the storage and use of biological signals and images. System descriptions are welcome if they illustrate and substantiate the underlying methodology that is the principal focus of the report and an effort is made to address the generalizability and/or range of application of that methodology. Note also that, given the international nature of JBI, papers that deal with specific languages other than English, or with country-specific health systems or approaches, are acceptable for JBI only if they offer generalizable lessons that are relevant to the broad JBI readership, regardless of their country, language, culture, or health system.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信