Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract In 2023, Martinez et al examined trends in the inclusion, conceptualization, operationalization, and analysis of race and ethnicity among studies published in US epidemiology journals. Based on a random sample of articles (n = 1050) published from 1995-2018, the authors describe the treatment of race, ethnicity, and ethnorace in the analytic sample (n = 414, 39% of baseline sample) over time. The review supplies stark evidence of the routine omission and variability of measures of race and ethnicity in epidemiologic research. Between 32% and 19% of studies in each time stratum lacked race data; 61%-34% lacked ethnicity data. Informed by public health critical race praxis (PHCRP), this commentary discusses the implications of 4 problems the findings suggest pervade epidemiology: (1) a general lack of clarity about what race and ethnicity are; (2) the limited use of critical race or other theory; (3) an ironic lack of rigor in measuring race and ethnicity; and (4) the ordinariness of racism and White supremacy in epidemiology. The identified practices reflect neither current publication guidelines nor the state of the knowledge on race, ethnicity and racism; therefore, we conclude by offering recommendations to move epidemiology toward more rigorous research in an increasingly diverse society.
Ford et al. (Wed,) studied this question.