Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36273141›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Do patients want clinicians to ask about social needs and include this information in their medical record?

Steven M Albert, Polly McCracken, Thuy Bui, Janel Hanmer, Gary S Fischer, Jaishree Hariharan, Alton Everette James

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Safeguarding Social Determinants of Health Data at a Managed Health Plan.Advances in health information science and practice · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors.

Steven M AlbertDepartment of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, 6116, 130 DeSoto St, Pittsburgh, USA. smalbert@pitt.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6786-9956
Polly McCrackenDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Thuy BuiDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Janel HanmerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Gary S FischerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Jaishree HariharanDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Alton Everette JamesPitt Health Policy Institute and Department of Health Policy and Management, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial needs screening in primary care may be valuable for addressing non-medical health-related factors, such as housing insecurity, that interfere with optimal medical care. Yet it is unclear if patients welcome such screening and how comfortable they are having this information included in electronic health records (EHR).

objectiveTo assess patient attitudes toward inclusion of social needs information in the EHR and key correlates, such as sociodemographic status, self-rated health, and trust in health care. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND MAIN MEASURES: In a cross-sectional survey of patients attending a primary care clinic for annual or employment exams, 218/560 (38%) consented and completed a web survey or personal interview between 8/20/20-8/23/21. Patients provided social needs information using the Accountable Care Communities Screening Tool. For the primary outcome, patients were asked, "Would you be comfortable having these kinds of needs included in your health record (also known as your medical record or chart)?" ANALYSES: Regression models were estimated to assess correlates of patient comfort with including social needs information in medical records. KEY

resultsThe median age was 45, 68.8% were female, and 78% were white. Median income was $75,000 and 84% reported education beyond high school. 85% of patients reported they were very or somewhat comfortable with questions about social needs, including patients reporting social needs. Social need ranged from 5.5% (utilities) to 26.6% (housing), and nonwhite and gender-nonconforming patients reported greater need. 20% reported "some" or "complete" discomfort with social needs information included in the EHR. Adjusting for age, gender, race, education, trust, and self-rated health, each additional reported social need significantly increased discomfort with the EHR for documenting social needs.

conclusionsPeople with greater social needs were more wary of having this information placed in the EHR. This is a concerning finding, since one rationale for collecting social need data is to use this information (presumably in the EHR) for addressing needs.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareElectronic Health RecordsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningSurveys and QuestionnairesEHRPrimary careScreeningSocial determinants of healthSocial needs

Identifiers

PMID36273141
PMCPMC9588216

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.