Fiscella Kevin, Fremont Allen M
Departments of Family Medicine and Community and Preventive Medicine, University of Rochester, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY 14620, USA.
Health Serv Res. 2006 Aug;41(4 Pt 1):1482-500. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00551.x.
To review two indirect methods, geocoding and surname analysis, for estimating race/ethnicity as a means for health plans to assess disparities in care.
Review of published articles and unpublished data on the use of geocoding and surname analyses.
Few published studies have evaluated use of geocoding to estimate racial and ethnic characteristics of a patient population or to assess disparities in health care. Three of four studies showed similar estimates of the proportion of blacks and one showed nearly identical estimates of racial disparities, regardless of whether indirect or more direct measures (e.g., death certificate or CMS data) were used. However, accuracy depended on racial segregation levels in the population and region assessed and geocoding was unreliable for identifying Hispanics and Asians/Pacific Islanders. Similarly, several studies suggest surname analyses produces reasonable estimates of whether an enrollee is Hispanic or Asian/Pacific Islander and can identify disparities in care. However, accuracy depends on the concentrations of Asians or Hispanics in areas assessed. It is less accurate for women and more acculturated and higher SES persons due intermarriage, name changes, and adoption. Surname analysis is not accurate for identifying African Americans. Recent unpublished analyses suggest plans can successfully use a combined geocoding/surname analyses approach to identify disparities in care in most regions. Refinements based on Bayesian methods may make geocoding/surname analyses appropriate for use in areas where the accuracy is currently poor, but validation of these preliminary results is needed.
Geocoding and surname analysis show promise for estimating racial/ethnic health plan composition of enrollees when direct data on major racial and ethnic groups are lacking. These data can be used to assess disparities in care, pending availability of self-reported race/ethnicity data.
回顾两种间接方法,即地理编码和姓氏分析,以评估种族/族裔,作为健康计划评估医疗保健差异的一种手段。
回顾已发表的文章以及关于地理编码和姓氏分析使用情况的未发表数据。
很少有已发表的研究评估地理编码在估计患者群体的种族和族裔特征或评估医疗保健差异方面的应用。四项研究中有三项对黑人比例的估计相似,一项对种族差异的估计几乎相同,无论使用的是间接测量方法还是更直接的测量方法(例如死亡证明或医疗保险与医疗补助服务中心的数据)。然而,准确性取决于所评估人群和地区的种族隔离水平,并且地理编码在识别西班牙裔和亚裔/太平洋岛民方面不可靠。同样,几项研究表明,姓氏分析对于确定参保人是否为西班牙裔或亚裔/太平洋岛民能得出合理的估计,并且可以识别医疗保健方面的差异。然而,准确性取决于所评估地区的亚洲人或西班牙裔的集中程度。对于女性以及因通婚、改名和收养而文化适应程度更高、社会经济地位更高的人群,其准确性较低。姓氏分析在识别非裔美国人方面不准确。最近的未发表分析表明,在大多数地区,健康计划可以成功地使用地理编码/姓氏分析相结合的方法来识别医疗保健方面的差异。基于贝叶斯方法的改进可能会使地理编码/姓氏分析适用于目前准确性较差的地区,但需要对这些初步结果进行验证。
当缺乏主要种族和族裔群体的直接数据时,地理编码和姓氏分析在估计参保人的种族/族裔健康计划构成方面显示出前景。在获得自我报告的种族/族裔数据之前,这些数据可用于评估医疗保健方面的差异。