首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>SAGE Choice >A gold mine but still no Klondike: Nordic register data in healthinequalities research
【2h】

A gold mine but still no Klondike: Nordic register data in healthinequalities research

机译:金矿但仍然没有克朗代克犬:北欧人在健康方面登记数据不平等研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Aims: Future research on health inequality relies on data that cover life-course exposure, different birth cohorts and variation in policy contexts. Nordic register data have long been celebrated as a ‘gold mine’ for research, and fulfil many of these criteria. However, access to and use of such data are hampered by a number of hurdles and bottlenecks. We present and discuss the experiences of an ongoing Nordic consortium from the process of acquiring register data on socio-economic conditions and health in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Methods: We compare experiences of data-acquisition processes from a researcher’s perspective in the four countries and discuss the comparability of register data and the modes of collaboration available to researchers, given the prevailing ethical and legal restrictions. Results: The application processes we experienced were time-consuming, and decision structures were often fragmented. We found substantial variation between the countries in terms of processing times, costs and the administrative burden of the researcher. Concerned agencies differed in policy and practice which influenced both how and when data were delivered. These discrepancies present a challenge to comparative research.>Conclusions: We conclude that there are few signsof harmonisation, as called for by previous policy documents and researchpapers. Ethical vetting needs to be centralised both within and betweencountries in order to improve data access. Institutional factors that seemto facilitate access to register data at the national level include singlestorage environments for health and social data, simplified ethical vettingand user guidance.
机译:目的:关于健康不平等的未来研究依赖于涵盖生命过程暴露,不同出生队列和政策环境差异的数据。北欧登记册数据长期以来一直被誉为研究的“金矿”,并满足其中许多标准。但是,许多障碍和瓶颈阻碍了对此类数据的访问和使用。我们介绍并讨论了一个正在进行的北欧财团从丹麦,芬兰,挪威和瑞典获取有关社会经济状况和健康状况的登记数据的过程中的经验。方法:我们从四个国家的研究人员的角度比较数据获取过程的经验,并讨论注册数据的可比性以及研究人员在普遍存在的道德和法律限制的情况下可采用的合作方式。结果:我们经历的应用程序非常耗时,并且决策结构经常是零散的。我们发现各国之间在处理时间,成本和研究人员的行政负担方面存在很大差异。有关机构在政策和实践方面存在差异,这影响了如何以及何时传送数据。这些差异给比较研究提出了挑战。>结论:我们得出的结论是几乎没有迹象以前的政策文件和研究所要求的协调文件。道德审查需要集中在内部和内部国家以改善数据访问。似乎的制度因素方便在国家一级访问注册数据,包括用于健康和社交数据的存储环境,简化了道德审查和用户指南。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号