Ackerman Paul D, Kelly Michael L, Walsh Catherine A, Ross Lainie Friedman
Princeton University, USA.
Account Res. 2005 Jan-Mar;12(1):17-31. doi: 10.1080/08989620590918907.
Two policy statements published in pediatric journals encouraged researchers not to use race and ethnicity [R/E] to explain cohort differences without collecting and analyzing data that examine the potential underlying social mechanisms. We sought to determine if these statements had any impact on the reporting and discussion of R/E and sociodemographic markers [SM].
Articles in three general pediatric journals between July 2002 and June 2003 were reviewed, and were compared with previously collected data from July 1999-June 2000. We recorded whether the articles documented R/E or SM, or both, in the results, and whether they discussed their significance. Researchers were surveyed to determine whether and why they collected R/E data.
Race was reported in 156 of 228 articles (68%), but discussed in only one-third (75). Although there is wide interjournal variability, there was little change between the two periods. Seventy-two percent of respondents thought that R/E was or might be relevant to their research, and this influenced their decision to report and discuss R/E.
Most researchers report R/E and believe it is relevant to their research. Despite policies that reject R/E as explanatory variables, most researchers do not report or discuss the underlying social mechanisms that may explain R/E differences.
儿科期刊发表的两篇政策声明鼓励研究人员，在未收集和分析用以检验潜在社会机制的数据时，不要使用种族和族裔来解释队列差异。我们试图确定这些声明是否对种族和族裔以及社会人口统计学指标的报告和讨论产生了任何影响。
对2002年7月至2003年6月期间三种普通儿科期刊上的文章进行了审查，并与1999年7月至2000年6月期间收集的先前数据进行了比较。我们记录了文章在结果中是否记录了种族和族裔或社会人口统计学指标，或两者都记录了，以及它们是否讨论了其重要性。对研究人员进行了调查，以确定他们是否以及为何收集种族和族裔数据。
228篇文章中有156篇（68%）报告了种族，但只有三分之一（75篇）进行了讨论。尽管不同期刊之间存在很大差异，但两个时期之间变化不大。72%的受访者认为种族和族裔与他们的研究相关，这影响了他们报告和讨论种族和族裔的决定。
大多数研究人员报告了种族和族裔，并认为这与他们的研究相关。尽管有政策拒绝将种族和族裔作为解释变量，但大多数研究人员并未报告或讨论可能解释种族和族裔差异的潜在社会机制。
