Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/27729
Title: Does health and medical research consider geographic factors affecting study participants: a retrospective snapshot analysis of 11 leading journals
Contributor(s): Wark, Stuart  (author)orcid ; Hardikar, Natasha (author); Wensing, Martin (author); Lau, Bonnie (author); Anugerah, Joanne (author); Wallace, Gary (author); Powell, Destiny (author); Thai, Henry (author); Zhou, Jessica (author); Senthinathan, Alycia (author); Le, Ann (author)
Publication Date: 2021
Early Online Version: 2019-07-11
DOI: 10.1007/s10389-019-01117-w
Handle Link: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/27729
Abstract: Background: Research has identified that rurally located persons face health inequities when compared to their urban peers. While health policies and practice frameworks to address the needs of rural people are largely developed on the principles of evidence-based medicine, it is not clear whether this evidence base appropriately considers geographic factors that may impact participant outcomes. The purpose of this project was to examine whether research within leading health and medical journals identified the geographic classification (location) of their participants, thus enabling the original authors and subsequent readers to appropriately consider this factor in the making of policy and practice recommendations. Methods: A retrospective analysis of study participants’ geographic identifiers within articles from medical and health journals was carried out in this project. Eleven journals were chosen for evaluation, with 300 consecutive eligible papers from each journal retrospectively reviewed. All 3300 papers were analyzed to determine whether the research participants’ geographic location was identified. This classification was then stratified into varying categories of rural or urban, as appropriate. Results: It was not possible to identify participants’ geographic location in 2193 (66%) of the 3300 reviewed articles. A total of 121 papers (4%) had sole focus on rural residents, with another 95 articles (3%) comparing outcomes between rural and urban locations. Slightly more than a quarter (27%) of the articles either just featured urban participants or made no distinction between rural and urban locations. Conclusions: These findings indicate that insufficient attention is given to the geographic location of participants. This failure means that the outcomes and recommendations of the research base may be invalid for a large section of the world’s population and result in inequities in healthcare services. There is an emerging concern about using this evidence base for developing health guidelines and policy frameworks, as the needs of a substantial proportion of the population may not have been appropriately captured.
Publication Type: Journal Article
Source of Publication: Journal of Public Health, 29(1), p. 205-214
Publisher: Springer
Place of Publication: Germany
ISSN: 1613-2238
2198-1833
Fields of Research (FoR) 2008: 111706 Epidemiology
111708 Health and Community Services
111711 Health Information Systems (incl. Surveillance)
Fields of Research (FoR) 2020: 420299 Epidemiology not elsewhere classified
420305 Health and community services
420308 Health informatics and information systems
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2008: 920206 Health Inequalities
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2020: 200204 Health inequalities
Peer Reviewed: Yes
HERDC Category Description: C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Rural Medicine

Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
Show full item record
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.