Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32970571›Full record

ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2020

Improving Understanding of Screening Questions for Social Risk and Social Need Among Emergency Department Patients.

Gia Ciccolo, Alexa Curt, Carlos A Camargo, Margaret Samuels-Kalow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Emergency Department: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The 'PeerJ · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors.

Gia CiccoloMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Alexa CurtMassachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Carlos A CamargoHarvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Margaret Samuels-KalowHarvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWith recent healthcare policy changes, including the creation of accountable care organizations, screening for social risks such as food and housing insecurity has become increasingly common in the healthcare system. However, the wide variety of different tools used for screening makes it challenging to compare across systems. In addition, the majority of tools used to measure social risks have only been tested in primary care settings and may not be optimal for emergency department (ED) use. Therefore, the goal of this study was to create a brief social screening tool for use in EDs.

methodsWe developed an initial tool using publicly available questions corresponding to the five core categories of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' Accountable Health Communities Screening Tool. Iterative cycles of cognitive interviews with purposively sampled participants were performed using a hybrid model of think-aloud and verbal probing to understand/experience answering questions and potential comprehension challenges. After thematic saturation was reached in one cycle, the tool was changed per participant input; cycles were completed until thematic saturation was reached overall.

resultsA total of 16 participants (six patient guardians and 10 patients) completed cognitive interviews throughout three cycles. Participant feedback included suggestions for further clarification and simplification of survey questions for improved comprehension. The survey was thus reduced and simplified from 16 questions concerning five domains to 10 questions concerning four domains.

conclusionWe used an iterative cognitive interviewing process to develop a social screening tool for use in EDs. This process demonstrates the importance of patient input to refine questionnaires, and provides a brief screening tool for ED use.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalPsychological DistanceSocial Determinants of HealthSurveys and QuestionnairesHumansMass ScreeningNeeds AssessmentRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32970571
PMCPMC7514400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.