Reporting Information About Race and Ethnicity of Participants in Research Presented at the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons (SGS)

Author Type(s)

Faculty

Document Type

Abstract

Publication Date

6-2021

DOI

10.1016/j.ajog.2021.04.005

Journal Title

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Department

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objectives

Due to impact of systemic racism on health disparities, we aimed to determine how frequently race and ethnicity are reported in SGS presentations and how inclusive our studies are.

Materials and Methods

Abstracts of SGS oral presentations (2016-2020) and manuscripts of featured SGS papers (2016 – 2019) were reviewed, extracting data regarding the number of subjects, reported race and ethnicity. Studies of non-human subjects were excluded. Proportion of studies that reported data about race, ethnicity was calculated. Descriptive statistics characterized race and ethnicity of participants.

Results

There were 86 abstracts (2016-2020) and 38 manuscripts (2016-2020) were reviewed. Seventy-nine of 86 abstracts and 32 of 38 manuscripts met inclusion criteria. Data were reported on subject race in 11 of 79 (14%) abstracts and 25 of 32 (78.1%) manuscripts; ethnicity was reported in 5 of 79 (6%) abstracts and 17 of 32 (53.1%) manuscripts. Of 1,056,566 participants reported in all SGS oral abstract presentations, there were 95,156 (9%) participants reporting race and 2,943 (0.3%) reporting ethnicity. One abstract of 86,023 women did not report numbers of race/ethnicity but factored it into a logistic regression. When this study is removed, leaving 10 studies with 37,911 participants, 27,257 (72%) were reported as White/Caucasian, 3,553 (9.4%) as Black/African American, 703 (1.9%) as Asian, 0 as Native Hawaiian/ Other Pacific Islander, and 0 as American Indian/Alaska Native. When 2 more large database studies were removed from this count, leaving only research conducted on subjects recruited by SGS researchers, 4 of 8 (50%) studies reported categories other than White. Of these 8 studies with 1,319 participants, 1,148 (87%) were White, 49 (3.7%) Black, and no participants were reported as Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native. Of 5 studies that had ethnicity reported (n = 29,606), 10.4% were Hispanic. When 1 database study was removed, there were 4 original studies (n = 1,327) with patients recruited by SGS researchers, of which only 13% were Hispanic. Three of 79 studies reported any other health care disparity, including 1 reporting education level and 3 reporting insurance status. Out of 32 papers with 959,619 participants, 124,787 (13%%) were reported as White, 16,121 (16.8%) as Black, 1,275 (1.3%) Asian, 27 (0.0%) Native Hawaiian/ or Other Pacific Islander, and 0 as American Indian or Alaska Native.

Conclusion

The majority of abstracts of research presented at the SGS podium do not include information about race/ethnicity; featured SGS manuscripts published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology are more likely to report these data however still do not represent the diversity of the U.S. population. To interrupt the impact of structural racism on health, it is imperative that future research characterize participant race and ethnicity in publications and increase the number of women from diverse race and ethnicity included but also increase minority involvement in study design, recruitment, and implementation.

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS