Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31792864›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2020

Patient Perspectives on Addressing Social Needs in Primary Care Using a Screening and Resource Referral Intervention.

Clarissa Hsu, Stephanie Cruz, Hilary Placzek, Michelle Chapdelaine, Sara Levin, Fabiola Gutierrez, Sara Standish, Ian Maki, Mary Carl, Miriam Rosa Orantes and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
12.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Veterans' Experiences with a Social Need Intervention.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Bridging Gaps: Provider Perspectives on Integrating Systems for Health Equity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Clarissa HsuKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA. clarissa.w.hsu@kp.org.
Stephanie CruzDepartment of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Hilary PlaczekData Science, Clarify Health Solutions, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Michelle ChapdelaineKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sara LevinContra Costa Health Services, Martinez, CA, USA.
Fabiola GutierrezHealth Leads, Boston, MA, USA.
Sara StandishHealth Leads, Boston, MA, USA.
Ian MakiKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Mary CarlHealth Leads, Boston, MA, USA.
Miriam Rosa OrantesContra Costa Health Services, Martinez, CA, USA.
Duffy NewmanContra Costa Health Services, Martinez, CA, USA.
Allen CheadleKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USContra Costa Health Services · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterest is growing in interventions to address social needs in clinical settings. However, little is known about patients' perceptions and experiences with these interventions.

objectiveTo evaluate patients' experiences and patient-reported outcomes of a primary care-based intervention to help patients connect with community resources using trained volunteer advocates.

designQualitative telephone interviews with patients who had worked with the volunteer advocates. Sample and recruitment targets were equally distributed between patients who had at least one reported success in meeting an identified need and those who had no reported needs met, based on the database used to document patient encounters.

participantsOne hundred two patients.

interventionsPatients at the study clinic were periodically screened for social needs. If needs were identified, they were referred to a trained volunteer advocate who further assessed their needs, provided them with resource referrals, and followed up with them on whether their need was met. APPROACH: Thematic analysis was used to code the data. KEY

resultsInterviewed patients appreciated the services offered, especially the follow-up. Patients' ability to access the resource to which they were referred was enhanced by assistance with filling out forms, calling community resources, and other types of navigation. Patients also reported that interacting with the advocates made them feel listened to and cared for, which they perceived as noteworthy in their lives.

conclusionsThis patient-reported information provides key insights into a human-centered intervention in a clinical environment. Our findings highlight what works in clinical interventions addressing social needs and provide outcomes that are difficult to measure using existing quantitative metrics. Patients experienced the intervention as a therapeutic relationship/working alliance, a type of care that correlates with positive outcomes such as treatment adherence and quality of life. These insights will help design more patient-centered approaches to providing holistic patient care.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareQuality of LifeHumansMass ScreeningReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID31792864
PMCPMC7018904
OpenAlexW2994463657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.