RESUMEN
Intersectionality recognizes that in the context of sociohistorically shaped structural power relations, an individual's multiple social positions or identities (e.g., gender, ethnicity) can interact to affect health-related outcomes. Despite limited methodological guidance, intersectionality frameworks have increasingly been incorporated into epidemiological studies, both to describe health disparities and to examine their causes. This study aimed to advance methods in intersectional estimation of binary outcomes in descriptive health disparities research through evaluation of 7 potentially intersectional data analysis methods: cross-classification, regression with interactions, multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity (MAIHDA), and decision trees (CART, CTree, CHAID, random forest). Accuracy of estimated intersection-specific outcome prevalence was evaluated across 192 intersections using simulated data scenarios. For comparison we included a non-intersectional main effects regression. We additionally assessed variable selection performance amongst decision trees. Example analyses using National Health and Nutrition Examination Study data illustrated differences in results between methods. At larger sample sizes, all methods except for CART performed better than non-intersectional main effects regression. In smaller samples, MAIHDA was the most accurate method but showed no advantage over main effects regression, while random forest, cross-classification, and saturated regression were the least accurate, and CTree and CHAID performed moderately well. CART performed poorly for estimation and variable selection. Sensitivity analyses examining the bias-variance tradeoff suggest MAIHDA as the preferred unbiased method for accurate estimation of high-dimensional intersections at smaller sample sizes. Larger sample sizes are more imperative for other methods. Results support the adoption of an intersectional approach to descriptive epidemiology.
RESUMEN
Socioeconomic, ethnic and gender disparities in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) risk are well established but no studies have applied multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy (MAIHDA) within an intersectional framework to study this outcome. We study individuals at the first level of analysis and combinations of multiple social and demographic categorizations (i.e., intersectional strata) at the second level of analysis. Here we used MAIHDA to assess to what extent individual differences in the propensity of developing COPD are at the intersectional strata level. We also used MAIHDA to determine the degree of similarity in COPD incidence of individuals in the same intersectional stratum. This leads to an improved understanding of risk heterogeneity and of the social dynamics driving socioeconomic and demographic disparities in COPD incidence. Using data from 2,445,501 residents in Sweden aged 45-65, we constructed 96 intersectional strata combining categories of age, gender, income, education, civil- and migration status. The incidences of COPD ranged from 0.02% for young, native males with high income and high education who cohabited to 0.98% for older native females with low income and low education who lived alone. We calculated the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) that informs on the discriminatory accuracy of the categorizations. In a model that conflated additive and interaction effects, the ICC was good (20.0%). In contrast, in a model that measured only interaction effects, the ICC was poor (1.1%) suggesting that most of the observed differences in COPD incidence across strata are due to the main effects of the categories used to construct the intersectional matrix while only a minor share of the differences are attributable to intersectional interactions. We found conclusive interaction effects. The intersectional MAIHDA approach offers improved information to guide public health policies in COPD prevention, and such policies should adopt an intersectional perspective.