Inclusive data practices: disaggregating race and assessing comorbidities among American Indian and Alaska Native individuals in PRAMS.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 ETHNIC STUDIES
Ethnicity & Health Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-04 DOI:10.1080/13557858.2025.2525796
Micah Hartwell, KayLeigh Noblin, Jasha Lyons Echo-Hawk, Ashton Gatewood, Amy D Hendrix-Dicken
{"title":"Inclusive data practices: disaggregating race and assessing comorbidities among American Indian and Alaska Native individuals in PRAMS.","authors":"Micah Hartwell, KayLeigh Noblin, Jasha Lyons Echo-Hawk, Ashton Gatewood, Amy D Hendrix-Dicken","doi":"10.1080/13557858.2025.2525796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>To assess potential misclassification or exclusion of American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) individuals within the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) Phase 8, we compared differences between aggregated and self-reported race variables and their impact on maternal comorbidities.</p><p><strong>Methods/design: </strong>We utilized several CDC-provided ethnoracial identity variables alongside a disaggregated variable we created. We then estimated comorbidity prevalences between these groupings to determine the impact of these methodological differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PRAMS variables, <i>MRACE_AMI</i> and <i>MAT_RACE_PU</i>, included 13,341 (no distinction between AI and AN) and 7,494 AI (excluded AN altogether), respectively. Our constructed variable (n = 13,383) included 19 ethnoracial-subgroups and 42 tribal members not selecting AI/AN race. We found significant differences in the prevalence of comorbidities by these variables. For instance, the prevalence for diabetes with <i>MAT_RACE_PU</i> was 4.93%, with <i>MRACE_AMI</i> was 4.04%, but our subgroup <i>AI (alone)</i> was 5.46%, and <i>AN (alone)</i> was 1.37%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results highlight significant disparities in maternal comorbidities among AI/AN women when different racial classification strategies are employed. Disaggregating these data revealed differences that are crucial for understanding the unique health challenges faced by various subgroups.</p>","PeriodicalId":51038,"journal":{"name":"Ethnicity & Health","volume":" ","pages":"718-731"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12240471/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnicity & Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13557858.2025.2525796","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: To assess potential misclassification or exclusion of American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) individuals within the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) Phase 8, we compared differences between aggregated and self-reported race variables and their impact on maternal comorbidities.

Methods/design: We utilized several CDC-provided ethnoracial identity variables alongside a disaggregated variable we created. We then estimated comorbidity prevalences between these groupings to determine the impact of these methodological differences.

Results: PRAMS variables, MRACE_AMI and MAT_RACE_PU, included 13,341 (no distinction between AI and AN) and 7,494 AI (excluded AN altogether), respectively. Our constructed variable (n = 13,383) included 19 ethnoracial-subgroups and 42 tribal members not selecting AI/AN race. We found significant differences in the prevalence of comorbidities by these variables. For instance, the prevalence for diabetes with MAT_RACE_PU was 4.93%, with MRACE_AMI was 4.04%, but our subgroup AI (alone) was 5.46%, and AN (alone) was 1.37%.

Conclusion: Our results highlight significant disparities in maternal comorbidities among AI/AN women when different racial classification strategies are employed. Disaggregating these data revealed differences that are crucial for understanding the unique health challenges faced by various subgroups.

包容性数据实践:PRAMS中美国印第安人和阿拉斯加原住民个体的种族分类和合并症评估。
重要性:为了评估在妊娠风险评估监测系统(PRAMS)第8阶段中美国印第安人和阿拉斯加原住民(AI/AN)个体的潜在错误分类或排除,我们比较了汇总和自我报告的种族变量之间的差异及其对孕产妇合并症的影响。方法/设计:我们使用了几个cdc提供的种族身份变量以及我们创建的分类变量。然后,我们估计这些组之间的共病患病率,以确定这些方法差异的影响。结果:PRAMS变量MRACE_AMI和MAT_RACE_PU分别包含13341例(AI与AN无区别)和7494例AI(完全排除AN)。我们构建的变量(n = 13,383)包括19个种族亚群和42个不选择AI/AN种族的部落成员。我们发现这些变量在合并症患病率上存在显著差异。例如,糖尿病合并MAT_RACE_PU的患病率为4.93%,合并MRACE_AMI的患病率为4.04%,但我们的亚组AI(单独)患病率为5.46%,AN(单独)患病率为1.37%。结论:我们的研究结果突出了采用不同种族分类策略时AI/AN妇女产妇合并症的显著差异。对这些数据进行分类,揭示了对了解不同亚群体所面临的独特健康挑战至关重要的差异。
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
Ethnicity & Health
Ethnicity & Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ethnicity & Health is an international academic journal designed to meet the world-wide interest in the health of ethnic groups. It embraces original papers from the full range of disciplines concerned with investigating the relationship between ’ethnicity’ and ’health’ (including medicine and nursing, public health, epidemiology, social sciences, population sciences, and statistics). The journal also covers issues of culture, religion, gender, class, migration, lifestyle and racism, in so far as they relate to health and its anthropological and social aspects.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信