Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
Growing attention has been given to considering sex and gender in health research. However, this remains a challenge in the context of retrospective studies where self-reported gender measures are often unavailable. This study aimed to create and validate a composite gender index using data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS).
Methods
According to scientific literature and expert opinion, the GENDER Index was built using several variables available in the CCHS and deemed to be gender-related (e.g., occupation, receiving child support, number of working hours). Among workers aged 18–50 years who had no missing data for our variables of interest (n = 29,470 participants), propensity scores were derived from a logistic regression model that included gender-related variables as covariates and where biological sex served as the dependent variable. Construct validity of propensity scores (GENDER Index scores) were then examined.
Results
When looking at the distribution of the GENDER Index scores in males and females, they appeared related but partly independent. Differences in the proportion of females appeared between groups categorized according to the GENDER Index scores tertiles (p < 0.0001). Construct validity was also examined through associations between the GENDER Index scores and gender-related variables identified a priori such as choosing/avoiding certain foods because of weight concerns (p < 0.0001), caring for children as the most important thing contributing to stress (p = 0.0309), and ability to handle unexpected/difficult problems (p = 0.0375).
Conclusion
The GENDER Index could be useful to enhance the capacity of researchers using CCHS data to conduct gender-based analysis among populations of workers.
Funder
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
The Quebec SUPPORT Unit
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Medicine
Reference46 articles.
1. AERA/APA/NCME (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME).
2. Bekker, M. H. J. (2003). Investigating gender within health research is more than sex disaggregation of data: a multi-facet gender and health model. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 8(2), 231–243.
3. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155–162.
4. Bernatsky, S., Lix, L., O’Donnell, S., & Lacaille, D. (2013). Consensus statements for the use of administrative health data in rheumatic disease research and surveillance. The Journal of Rheumatology, 40(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.120835.
5. Boerner, K. E., Chambers, C. T., Gahagan, J., Keogh, E., Fillingim, R. B., & Mogil, J. S. (2018). Conceptual complexity of gender and its relevance to pain. Pain, 159(11), 2137–2141. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001275.
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献