Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin, 305 E 23rd St, A1700, Austin, TX 78712-1086, USA; Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture, 2021 Guadalupe St., Suite 260, Austin, TX 78705, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Sep;188:157-165. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.018. Epub 2016 Nov 14.
The study of stigma's influence on health has surged in recent years. Hatzenbuehler et al.'s (2014) study of structural stigma's effect on mortality revealed an average of 12 years' shorter life expectancy for sexual minorities who resided in communities thought to exhibit high levels of anti-gay prejudice, using data from the 1988-2002 administrations of the US General Social Survey linked to mortality outcome data in the 2008 National Death Index.
In the original study, the key predictor variable (structural stigma) led to results suggesting the profound negative influence of structural stigma on the mortality of sexual minorities. Attempts to replicate the study, in order to explore alternative hypotheses, repeatedly failed to generate the original study's key finding on structural stigma. Efforts to discern the source of the disparity in results revealed complications in the multiple imputation process for missing values of the components of structural stigma. This prompted efforts at replication using 10 different imputation approaches.
Efforts to replicate Hatzenbuehler et al.'s (2014) key finding on structural stigma's notable influence on the premature mortality of sexual minorities, including a more refined imputation strategy than described in the original study, failed. No data imputation approach yielded parameters that supported the original study's conclusions. Alternative hypotheses, which originally motivated the present study, revealed little new information.
Ten different approaches to multiple imputation of missing data yielded none in which the effect of structural stigma on the mortality of sexual minorities was statistically significant. Minimally, the original study's structural stigma variable (and hence its key result) is so sensitive to subjective measurement decisions as to be rendered unreliable.
近年来，对污名化对健康影响的研究急剧增加。Hatzenbuehler 等人（2014 年）对结构性污名对死亡率影响的研究表明，居住在被认为存在高度反同偏见的社区的性少数群体的预期寿命平均缩短了 12 年，他们使用了来自美国 1988 年至 2002 年期间的一般社会调查数据，这些数据与 2008 年国家死亡指数中的死亡率结果数据相关联。
在原始研究中，关键预测变量（结构性污名）导致的结果表明，结构性污名对性少数群体的死亡率有深远的负面影响。为了探索替代假设，尝试重复该研究，但未能重复产生原始研究中关于结构性污名的关键发现。为了找出结果差异的来源，努力发现了结构性污名成分缺失值的多重插补过程中的复杂问题。这促使使用 10 种不同的插补方法进行复制。
努力复制 Hatzenbuehler 等人（2014 年）关于结构性污名对性少数群体过早死亡有显著影响的关键发现，包括比原始研究中描述的更精细的插补策略，但未能成功。没有一种数据插补方法得出的参数支持原始研究的结论。最初推动本研究的替代假设揭示了很少有新信息。
十种不同的缺失数据多重插补方法都没有得出结构性污名对性少数群体死亡率有统计学意义的结论。至少，原始研究中的结构性污名变量（及其关键结果）对主观测量决策如此敏感，以至于变得不可靠。
