Intersectional decomposition analysis with differential exposure, effects, and construct

被引:60
作者
Jackson, John W. [1 ,2 ]
VanderWeele, Tyler J. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, 615 N Wolfe St,Room E-6543, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Mental Hlth, Baltimore, MD USA
[3] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Boston, MA USA
[4] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Boston, MA USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Intersectionality; Mediation; Decomposition; Oaxaca-blinder; Vulnerability; Disparities; Equity; Inequalities; CARDIOVASCULAR-DISEASE; CAUSAL INFERENCE; DISPARITIES; MEDIATION; RACE; INTERVENTIONS; PATHWAYS; RISK; SEX;
D O I
10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.01.033
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
In recent years a wide array of proposals for bringing intersectional perspectives into quantitative studies of health disparities have appeared, from studies of interaction, predictive discrimination, to mediation. Bauer and Scheim, in a companion set of articles, extend these proposals by developing new attribution-blind measures of perceived discrimination and using VanderWeele's 3-way decomposition to quantify its contribution to disparities through differential exposure and differential effects (sometimes called differential vulnerability or susceptibility). In this commentary, after providing an overview of causal inference interpretations with social characteristics, we provide a broad overview of old and new decomposition methods in the social sciences literature and contrast their strengths and weaknesses for studying intersectional inequalities. We then examine how different forms of differential effects can be expressed within these decompositions and discuss their utility for the purpose of informing interventions for reducing disparities. Last, we discuss the tension in social sciences research when prominent explanatory variables represent constructs that are only defined or exist for certain marginalized populations and may not neatly fit within the decomposition methods framework. Through these discussions, we aim to provide greater conceptual clarity for applied researchers who are interested in using decomposition methods and other approaches to advance intersectional equity.
引用
收藏
页码:254 / 259
页数:6
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], INT ENCY SOCIAL BEHA
[2]  
[Anonymous], SOC SCI MED
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2006, P 22 C UNCERTAINTY A
[4]   THE MODERATOR MEDIATOR VARIABLE DISTINCTION IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL-RESEARCH - CONCEPTUAL, STRATEGIC, AND STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BARON, RM ;
KENNY, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1173-1182
[5]  
Bauer Greta., 2019, Social Science and Medicine
[6]   Incorporating intersectionality theory into population health research methodology: Challenges and the potential to advance health equity [J].
Bauer, Greta R. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2014, 110 :10-17
[7]   WAGE DISCRIMINATION - REDUCED FORM AND STRUCTURAL ESTIMATES [J].
BLINDER, AS .
JOURNAL OF HUMAN RESOURCES, 1973, 8 (04) :436-455
[8]   Invited Reflection: Quantifying Intersectionality [J].
Bowleg, Lisa ;
Bauer, Greta .
PSYCHOLOGY OF WOMEN QUARTERLY, 2016, 40 (03) :337-341
[9]   The Problem With the Phrase Women and Minorities: Intersectionality-an Important Theoretical Framework for Public Health [J].
Bowleg, Lisa .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2012, 102 (07) :1267-1273
[10]   Health disparities and health equity: Concepts and measurement [J].
Braveman, P .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2006, 27 :167-194