Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Special Collections
    • Abstracts In Press
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Special Collections
    • Abstracts In Press
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube

Expanding Race and Ethnicity Information Beyond Limited Preset Categories in Research and Clinical Care

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Lillie D. Williamson, PhD; Hailie C. Hayes, BS; Peter-Jon C. Williams, BS; Wanda Jirau-Rosaly, MD; Christy J.W. Ledford, PhD, FACH

Corresponding Author: Hailie C. Hayes, BS; Department of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Georgia at Augusta University. 

Email: hahayes@augusta.edu

DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2025.250296R1

Keywords: Academic Medical Centers, Culturally Sensitive Research, Data Accuracy, Electronic Health Records, Ethnicity, Minority Groups, Patient-Oriented Research, Research Design, Self Report

Dates: Submitted: 07-31-2025; Revised: 12-04-2025; Accepted: 12-15-2025

Status: In Press.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate and complete measurement of race and ethnicity is essential in clinical research and practice but often undermined by inconsistent definitions and flawed data sources. Electronic Health Records (EHR) regularly contain race and ethnicity information, yet some studies reveal errors, particularly for individuals from minority groups. Our study evaluates how data quality varies across three methods of collecting race and ethnicity information: EHR-extracted demographics, self-reported information via closed-ended questions, and self-reported information via open-ended questions.

METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of four datasets from an academic medical center in the Southeastern U.S. Each dataset included two measures of race and ethnicity, enabling cross-tabulation to evaluate alignment and missingness. Datasets varied by administration mode and data collection method, including oral and written surveys with open- and closed-ended formats, and EHR-extracted values.

RESULTS: Among 337 participants, self-reported data were generally more complete and sometimes more accurate than EHR data. Open-ended responses improved data richness and allowed for more personal identities to be reported (e.g., “Vietnamese,” “Haitian-American”). These responses helped clarify identities obscured by limited preset categories and facilitated better representation of Middle Eastern and North African participants.

DISCUSSION: The way race and ethnicity questions are asked impacts both accuracy and completeness of data. Open-ended self-reporting allows for greater specificity and personal identity avowal. Findings urge family medicine researchers and clinicians to critically reflect on how and why race and ethnicity data are collected, and to prioritize participant-defined identity in both research and care. 

ABSTRACTS IN PRESS

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2026 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire