{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Assessing the heterogeneity of ethnic categories for patient records in primary care.
{Author}: Hameed J;Hornby C;Rai T;Hayward G;Dixon S;
{Journal}: Br J Gen Pract
{Volume}: 74
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Jun 20
{Factor}: 6.302
{DOI}: 10.3399/bjgp24X737613
{Abstract}: BACKGROUND: UK general practice surgeries collect data regarding patient ethnicities, typically at registration. These data are subsequently used in both clinical care and research, for example, when embedded in risk modelling tools. The published standard list of ethnic categories exists, but little is known about what happens in frontline practice.
OBJECTIVE: To document the variation in ethnic categories available on online patient registration forms across GP surgeries in Oxfordshire.
METHODS: Of all 67 GP surgeries in Oxfordshire, 56 had online registration forms that included an option list for ethnicity reporting. The authors compared these against the 2001, 2011, and 2021 UK census ethnic group categorisation.
RESULTS: Significant heterogeneity was identified across practices. The number of options for ethnicity group ranged from 5 to 84, with a median of 14, compared to the census lists that comprise of 19 (2021), 18 (2011), and 16 (2001) groups. Of the 56 practices, six used the 2001 census list, five used the 2011 census list, and none used the 2021 census list. Overall, 45 practices used lists that differed from any census list, including categories not typically considered to be ethnic, for example 'Muslim' or 'Buddhist', meaning individuals could potentially identify with multiple options.
CONCLUSIONS: High-quality research and healthcare data that includes patient ethnicity is essential to understand, document, and mitigate against health inequalities. However, this may be compromised by poorly conceived ethnic categorisations and a lack of standardisation. This pilot/exploratory study suggests that the ethnicity records in primary health care may be neither standardised nor meaningful.