In Class Exercise 2/6-2/8

#1
1. M A Winkleby, D E Jatulis, E Frank, and S P Fortmann.  Socioeconomic status and health: how education, income, and occupation contribute to risk factors for cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Public Health June 1992: Vol. 82, No. 6, pp. 816-820.
2. Cross Sectional/Forward Selection Model
3. The author uses the cross sectional method to collect data on participants then examining independent variables like education, income, and occupation(SES) to examine the relationship of these factors to cardiovascular disease risk factors. I think that the authors chose this method instead of the others because they are using different groups of people who differ in many independent variables, but share one common characteristic.
4. The results of the study led them to realize "the relationship between these SES measures and risk factors was strongest and most consistent for education, showing higher risk associated with lower levels of education. Using a forward selection model that allowed for inclusion of all three SES measures after adjustment for age and time of survey, education was the only measure that was significantly associated with the risk factors".
5. One thing I found interesting is that "if economics or time dictate that a single parameter of SES be chosen and if the research hypothesis does not dictate otherwise, higher education may be the best SES predictor of good health."

#2
1. ST, Bird, and Bogart LM., Perceived Race-based and Socioeconomic Status(SES)-based Discrimination in Interactions With Health Care Providers.Europe PMC., 01 Jan. 1970.
2. Cross Sectional
3. The authors implemented the cross sectional method through studying African American Adults that completed self-report questionnaires regarding their experiences with and attitudes toward health care providers. I think that they chose this method versus the other ones because they wanted to get the opinions of everyday people instead of using statistical data.
4.  In conclusion the authors found that, "Almost two thirds (63%) of participants perceived discrimination in their interactions with health care providers based on their race or color, and 58.9% perceived discrimination based on their socioeconomic status or social class. Some experiences of perceived discrimination were correlated with measures of health care utilization. Education and stigma consciousness were positively correlated with perceptions of both race-based and SES-based discrimination. Stigma consciousness was not significantly correlated with education, suggesting that expectations that one will be stereotyped by doctors do not account for the relationship between education and reports of perceived discrimination in interactions with health care providers." by using the cross sectional research method.
5. One thing I found to be really interesting from this source is the evidence that they found. I think the most interesting piece I found was that the expectation of stereotyping from doctors has no relation to the relationship between education and reports of discrimination.

#3
1.Fiscella K, Franks P, Gold MR, Clancy CM. Inequality in QualityAddressing Socioeconomic, Racial, and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. JAMA. 2000;283(19):2579-2584.
2. Grounded Theory
3. The method that was used in this source is grounded theory.Grounded theory is ideally suited for qualitative research where the data is collected through interviews and observations and when you analyze data first and then form your theory. Which s exactly what this article did, "after reviewing literature on disparities in health care, we discuss the limitations in existing quality assessment for identifying and addressing these disparities."
4. Using the grounded theory method the authors collected the information that they needed and proceed to form a theory. "We propose 5 principles to address these disparities through modifications in quality performance measures: disparities represent a significant quality problem; current data collection efforts are inadequate to identify and address disparities; clinical performance measures should be stratified by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position for public reporting; population-wide monitoring should incorporate adjustment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position; and strategies to adjust payment for race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position should be considered to reflect the known effects of both on morbidity."
5. Something that I found really interesting in this source is the fact that the authors came up with the five principles to address the disparities, and this is the first source that I have seen do that.

#4
1.Gay Becker and Edwina Newsom.  Socioeconomic Status and Dissatisfaction With Health Care Among Chronically Ill African Americans. American Journal of Public Health: May 2003, Vol. 93, No. 5, pp. 742-748.
2. Qualitative
3. This source uses the qualitative research method to address the differences in social class and how it is critical to an examination of racial disparities in health care. "Low socioeconomic status is an important determinant of access to health care.
4. Using the qualitative research method the researchers found,"Results from a qualitative, in-depth interview study of 60 African Americans who had one or more chronic illnesses found that low-income respondents expressed much greater dissatisfaction with health care than did middle-income respondents. Low socioeconomic status has potentially deadly consequences for several reasons: its associations with other determinants of health status, its relationship to health insurance or the absence there of, and the constraints on care at sites serving people who have low incomes." This is good evidence to use when writing my research paper because it correlates directly allowing to provide evidence.
5. One thing I found interesting in this article is the fact that people with low socioeconomic status expressed dissatisfaction with health care in comparison to people with middle-income. I found this interesting because that means that the people used in the study are most likely experiencing some  sort of discrimination because of their status, and they are noticing. I find this to be kind of disturbing because people are being treated unfairly because of their income and they might not even be in control of their status.