Flaskerud J H, Nyamathi A M
UCLA School of Nursing, Los Angeles, California, USA.
ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2000 Jun;22(4):1-15. doi: 10.1097/00012272-200006000-00002.
Despite the National Institutes of Health (NIH) mandate to include women and diverse ethnic groups in all NIH-funded research projects, these groups are still excluded as participants in health intervention research. This exclusion has denied them access to state-of-the-art treatments and prevention strategies. making them vulnerable to increased morbidity and mortality and decreased longevity. This article compares two conceptual approaches to inclusion: cultural responsiveness and resource provision. Several issues are raised as to why women and ethnic people of color are not involved in health intervention research. For each of these issues, an appraisal is made as to whether cultural responsiveness or resource provision would more successfully address the problem. It is concluded that cultural responsiveness facilitates participation in research but is not sufficient. An equally important, if not more important, approach may be the provision of resources to empower participants to address problems of access and burden.
尽管美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)规定在所有由NIH资助的研究项目中纳入女性和不同种族群体,但这些群体在健康干预研究中仍被排除在参与者之外。这种排除使他们无法获得最先进的治疗和预防策略,从而使他们更容易出现发病率和死亡率上升以及寿命缩短的情况。本文比较了两种关于纳入的概念性方法:文化响应性和资源提供。针对女性和有色人种未参与健康干预研究的原因提出了几个问题。对于这些问题中的每一个,都评估了文化响应性或资源提供是否能更成功地解决该问题。得出的结论是,文化响应性有助于参与研究,但并不充分。一种同样重要(如果不是更重要的话)的方法可能是提供资源,使参与者有能力解决获取和负担方面的问题。