ArticleJournal of community health2019
Are We Serving the Most At-Risk Communities? Examining the Reach of a South Carolina Home Visiting Program.
Article in Journal of community health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In addition to individual-level characteristics, characteristics of the social and physical environments in which individuals reside may adversely impact health outcomes. Careful attention to the role of "place" can result in programs that successfully deliver services to those most at risk. This retrospective, cross-sectional study used geocoded residential addresses from 3090 households enrolled in a South Carolina (SC) home visiting program, 2013-2016, and corresponding years of data for maternal and child health outcomes obtained from vital records data. ZIP Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs) served as the primary geographic unit of analysis. ZCTAS with high volumes of birth or adverse maternal and child health outcomes for any of 10 indicators were flagged. Distribution of enrolled households across highest-risk ZCTAs was calculated. Of 379 ZCTAS with reported data, 152 had 8 or more risk flags. Of the 152 highest-risk ZCTAs, 33 also had high birth volumes. Fifty-seven of the 152 highest-risk ZCTAs had no enrollees; seven of the 33 highest-risk/highest-volume ZCTAS had no enrollees. Service delivery gaps existed despite a statewide, county-level needs assessment conducted prior to program implementation. This study suggests methods to identify service areas of need, as an ongoing effort toward program improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30554297What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.