Cultural specificity and comparison in psychiatric epidemiology: walking the tightrope in American Indian research.
Saved in:
| Title: | Cultural specificity and comparison in psychiatric epidemiology: walking the tightrope in American Indian research. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Beals, Janette, Manson, Spero M., Mitchell, Christina M., Spicer, Paul, AI-SUPERPFP Team |
| Source: | Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry. Sep2003, Vol. 27 Issue 3, p259-289. 31p. |
| Subjects: | Psychiatric epidemiology, Native Americans, Cross-cultural orientation, Diseases, Mental illness, Comparative studies, Dual diagnosis, Endowment of research, Psychology of Native Americans, Research methodology, Medical cooperation, Needs assessment, Cultural pluralism, Research, Research funding, Substance abuse, Ethnology research, Evaluation research, Disease prevalence |
| Geographic Terms: | United States |
| Abstract: | Increasingly, the mental health needs of populations are measured using large-sample surveys with standardized measures and methods. Such efforts, however, rarely include sufficient number of smaller, culturally defined populations to draw defensible conclusions about their needs. Furthermore, without some adaptation, the standardized methods and measures may yield invalid results in such populations. Using a recently completed psychiatric epidemiology and services study with American Indian populations as a case example, this paper outlines issues facing epidemiologists working in such culturally diverse contexts. The issues discussed include the following: (1) persuading the scientific community and potential sponsors that work with distinct or culturally defined populations is important; (2) framing research questions and activities to meet the needs of communities; (3) defining a population of inference; (4) balancing the needs for comparability and cultural specificity; (5) maximizing scientific validity in light of the challenges in sample acquisition; and (6) developing and implementing data collection methods that uphold scientific standards but are also realistic given the context. The authors draw on their experiences--most recently in the American Indian Service Utilization, Psychiatric Epidemiology, Risk and Protective Factors Project (AI-SUPERPFP)--to illustrate these issues and suggest ways to address each. A goal of this paper is to challenge those invested in conducting culturally valid epidemiologic work in such populations to better articulate the nature of these efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
Be the first to leave a comment!
