Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug 30;10(8):e30987.
doi: 10.2196/30987.

Advancing Intersectional Discrimination Measures for Health Disparities Research: Protocol for a Bilingual Mixed Methods Measurement Study

Affiliations

Advancing Intersectional Discrimination Measures for Health Disparities Research: Protocol for a Bilingual Mixed Methods Measurement Study

Ayden I Scheim et al. JMIR Res Protoc. .

Abstract

Background: Guided by intersectionality frameworks, researchers have documented health disparities at the intersection of multiple axes of social status and position, particularly race and ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. To advance from identifying to intervening in such intersectional health disparities, studies that examine the underlying mechanisms are required. Although much research demonstrates the negative health impacts of perceived discrimination along single axes, quantitative approaches to assessing the role of discrimination in generating intersectional health disparities remain in their infancy. Members of our team recently introduced the Intersectional Discrimination Index (InDI) to address this gap. The InDI comprises three measures of enacted (day-to-day and major) and anticipated discrimination. These attribution-free measures ask about experiences of mistreatment because of who you are. These measures show promise for intersectional health disparities research but require further validation across intersectional groups and languages. In addition, the proposal to remove attributions is controversial, and no direct comparison has ever been conducted.

Objective: This study aims to cognitively and psychometrically evaluate the InDI in English and Spanish and determine whether attributions should be included.

Methods: The study will draw on a preliminary validation data set and three original sequentially collected sources of data: qualitative cognitive interviews in English and Spanish with a sample purposively recruited across intersecting social status and position (gender, sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, age, and nativity); a Spanish quantitative survey (n=500; 250/500, 50% sexual and gender minorities); and an English quantitative survey (n=3000), with quota sampling by race and ethnicity (Black, Latino/a/x, and White), sexual or gender minority status, and gender.

Results: The study was funded by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities in May 2021, and data collection began in July 2021.

Conclusions: The key deliverables of the study will be bilingual measures of anticipated, day-to-day, and major discrimination validated for multiple health disparity populations using qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods.

International registered report identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/30987.

Keywords: discrimination; health disparities; measurement; psychometrics; racism; stigma; survey research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine . In: Understanding the Well-Being of LGBTQI+ Populations. Patterson C, Sepúlveda M, White J, editors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2020. - PubMed
    1. Adler NE, Rehkopf DH. U.S. disparities in health: descriptions, causes, and mechanisms. Annu Rev Public Health. 2008 Apr;29(1):235–52. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.020907.090852. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Crenshaw K. Demarginalizing the intersection of racesex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theoryantiracist politics. In: Bartlett K, Kennedy R, editors. Feminist Legal Theory. Milton, UK: Routledge; 1989. pp. 1–446.
    1. King DK. Multiple jeopardy, multiple consciousness: the context of a black feminist ideology. Signs J Women Cult Soc. 1988 Oct;14(1):42–72. doi: 10.1086/494491. - DOI
    1. Collins P. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Milton, UK: Routledge; 2002. pp. 1–384.