Search

The article discusses the reproducibility initiative at the Journal of the American Statistical Association (JASA). The initiative aims to address the lack of standardized practices for reproducibility in scientific research. It establishes minimum criteria for the inclusion of code, data, and workflow in research manuscripts and has implemented a new editorial role, the Associate Editor of Reproducibility (AER), to enforce these standards. The article explains the type of reproducibility being addressed, describes the steps of the review process, and provides guidelines for authors to streamline their reproducibility materials. The JASA reproducibility initiative is part of a larger movement in the scientific community to address the replicability crisis in science. The article emphasizes the importance of reproducibility in statistics to support the validity of research and foster transparency and accountability. It also addresses common questions and misconceptions about the reproducibility review process at JASA. The article concludes by encouraging wider discussions and the adoption of common standards for reproducibility in statistical journals. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Racial/ethnic frailty prevalence disparities have been documented. Better elucidating how these operate may inform interventions to eliminate them. We aimed to determine whether physical frailty phenotype (PFP) prevalence disparities (i) are explained by health aspects, (ii) vary by income, or (iii) differ in degree across individual PFP criteria.Methods: Data came from the 2011 National Health and Aging Trends Study baseline evaluation. The study sample (n = 7,439) included persons in all residential settings except nursing homes. Logistic regression was used to achieve aims (i)-(iii) listed above. In (i), health aspects considered were body mass index (BMI) status and number of chronic diseases. Analyses incorporated sampling weights and adjusted for sociodemographic factors.Results: Comparisons are versus non-Hispanic whites: Non-Hispanic blacks (odds ratio [OR] = 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.76) and Hispanics (1.56, 1.20-2.03) continued to have higher odds of frailty after accounting for BMI status and number of chronic diseases. Non-Hispanic blacks had elevated odds of frailty in all income quartiles, including the highest (OR = 2.19, 1.24-3.397). Racial/ethnic disparities differed considerably across frailty criteria, ranging from a twofold increase in odds of slowness to a 25%-30% decrease in odds of self-reported exhaustion.Conclusions: BMI and disease burden do not explain racial/ethnic frailty disparities. Black-white disparities are not restricted to low-income groups. Racial/ethnic differences vary considerably by NHATS PFP criteria. Our findings support the need to better understand mechanisms underlying elevated frailty burden in older non-Hispanic black and Hispanic Americans, how phenotypic measures capture frailty in racial/ethnic subgroups and, potentially, how to create assessments more comparable by race/ethnicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this article was to assess segregation’s role on race differences in hypertension among non-Hispanic Blacks and Whites aged 50 and over. Method: Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥ 140 mmHg, diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg, or self-reported antihypertensive medication use. Segregation measures combined race, neighborhood racial composition, and individual and neighborhood poverty level. Logistic models produced odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each segregation category, adjusting for health-related factors. Results: Blacks in Black (OR = 2.54, CI = [1.61, 4.00]), White (OR = 2.56, CI = [1.24, 5.31]), and integrated neighborhoods (OR = 3.23, CI = [1.72, 6.03]) had greater odds of hypertension compared with Whites in White neighborhoods. Poor Whites in poor neighborhoods (OR = 1.74, CI = [1.09, 2.76]), nonpoor Blacks in nonpoor (OR = 3.03, CI = [1.79, 5.12]) and poor neighborhoods (OR = 4.08, CI = [2.16, 7.70]), and poor Blacks in nonpoor (OR = 4.35, CI = [2.17, 8.73]) and poor neighborhoods (OR = 2.75, CI = [1.74, 4.36]) had greater odds compared with nonpoor Whites in nonpoor neighborhoods. Conclusion: Interventions targeting hypertension among older adults should consider neighborhood compositions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]