Doing Justice: Ethical Considerations Identifying and Researching Transgender and Gender Diverse People in Insurance Claims Data.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Medical Systems Pub Date : 2024-10-12 DOI:10.1007/s10916-024-02111-w
Ash B Alpert, Gray Babbs, Rebecca Sanaeikia, Jacqueline Ellison, Landon Hughes, Jonathan Herington, Robin Dembroff
{"title":"Doing Justice: Ethical Considerations Identifying and Researching Transgender and Gender Diverse People in Insurance Claims Data.","authors":"Ash B Alpert, Gray Babbs, Rebecca Sanaeikia, Jacqueline Ellison, Landon Hughes, Jonathan Herington, Robin Dembroff","doi":"10.1007/s10916-024-02111-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Data on the health of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people are scarce. Researchers are increasingly turning to insurance claims data to investigate disease burden among TGD people. Since claims do not include gender self-identification or modality (i.e., TGD or not), researchers have developed algorithms to attempt to identify TGD individuals using diagnosis, procedure, and prescription codes, sometimes also inferring sex assigned at birth and gender. Claims-based algorithms introduce epistemological and ethical complexities that have yet to be addressed in data informatics, epidemiology, or health services research. We discuss the implications of claims-based algorithms to identify and categorize TGD populations, including perpetuating cisnormative biases and dismissing TGD individuals' self-identification. Using the framework of epistemic injustice, we outline ethical considerations when undertaking claims-based TGD health research and provide suggestions to minimize harms and maximize benefits to TGD individuals and communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":16338,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Systems","volume":"48 1","pages":"96"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11469973/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-024-02111-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Data on the health of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people are scarce. Researchers are increasingly turning to insurance claims data to investigate disease burden among TGD people. Since claims do not include gender self-identification or modality (i.e., TGD or not), researchers have developed algorithms to attempt to identify TGD individuals using diagnosis, procedure, and prescription codes, sometimes also inferring sex assigned at birth and gender. Claims-based algorithms introduce epistemological and ethical complexities that have yet to be addressed in data informatics, epidemiology, or health services research. We discuss the implications of claims-based algorithms to identify and categorize TGD populations, including perpetuating cisnormative biases and dismissing TGD individuals' self-identification. Using the framework of epistemic injustice, we outline ethical considerations when undertaking claims-based TGD health research and provide suggestions to minimize harms and maximize benefits to TGD individuals and communities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伸张正义:在保险理赔数据中识别和研究变性人和不同性别者的伦理考虑。
有关变性者和性别多元化者(TGD)健康状况的数据很少。研究人员越来越多地利用保险理赔数据来调查变性人的疾病负担。由于理赔不包括性别自我认同或方式(即是否变性),研究人员开发了算法,试图通过诊断、手术和处方代码来识别变性人,有时还推断出生时的性别和性别分配。基于声称的算法带来了认识论和伦理方面的复杂性,这些问题在数据信息学、流行病学或健康服务研究中尚未得到解决。我们讨论了基于声称的算法对 TGD 群体进行识别和分类的影响,包括延续顺式规范偏见和否定 TGD 个人的自我认同。利用认识论不公正的框架,我们概述了在开展基于诉求的 TGD 健康研究时应考虑的伦理问题,并提出了一些建议,以最大限度地减少对 TGD 个人和社区的伤害,最大限度地增加其收益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Systems
Journal of Medical Systems 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
83
审稿时长
4.8 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Systems provides a forum for the presentation and discussion of the increasingly extensive applications of new systems techniques and methods in hospital clinic and physician''s office administration; pathology radiology and pharmaceutical delivery systems; medical records storage and retrieval; and ancillary patient-support systems. The journal publishes informative articles essays and studies across the entire scale of medical systems from large hospital programs to novel small-scale medical services. Education is an integral part of this amalgamation of sciences and selected articles are published in this area. Since existing medical systems are constantly being modified to fit particular circumstances and to solve specific problems the journal includes a special section devoted to status reports on current installations.
期刊最新文献
Garbage In, Garbage Out? Negative Impact of Physiological Waveform Artifacts in a Hospital Clinical Data Warehouse. 21st Century Cures Act and Information Blocking: How Have Different Specialties Responded? Self-Supervised Learning for Near-Wild Cognitive Workload Estimation. Electronic Health Records Sharing Based on Consortium Blockchain. Large Language Models in Healthcare: An Urgent Call for Ongoing, Rigorous Validation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1