Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36922957›Full record

ArticleAJOG global reports2023

Understanding social needs in pregnancy: Prospective validation of a digital short-form screening tool and patient survey.

Alex F Peahl, Lily Rubin-Miller, Victoria Paterson, Hannah R Jahnke, Avery Plough, Natalie Henrich, Christa Moss, Neel Shah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJOG global reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Implementing a Social Needs Screening and Referral Program for Obstetrics and Gynecology Patients.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    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

8 authors.

Alex F PeahlDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI (Dr Peahl).
Lily Rubin-MillerMaven Clinic, New York, NY (Dr Peahl, Ms Rubin-Miller, Dr Jahnke, Ms Plough, and Drs Henrich, Moss, and Shah).
Victoria PatersonWarren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island (Paterson).
Hannah R JahnkeMaven Clinic, New York, NY (Dr Peahl, Ms Rubin-Miller, Dr Jahnke, Ms Plough, and Drs Henrich, Moss, and Shah).
Avery PloughMaven Clinic, New York, NY (Dr Peahl, Ms Rubin-Miller, Dr Jahnke, Ms Plough, and Drs Henrich, Moss, and Shah).
Natalie HenrichMaven Clinic, New York, NY (Dr Peahl, Ms Rubin-Miller, Dr Jahnke, Ms Plough, and Drs Henrich, Moss, and Shah).
Christa MossMaven Clinic, New York, NY (Dr Peahl, Ms Rubin-Miller, Dr Jahnke, Ms Plough, and Drs Henrich, Moss, and Shah).
Neel ShahMaven Clinic, New York, NY (Dr Peahl, Ms Rubin-Miller, Dr Jahnke, Ms Plough, and Drs Henrich, Moss, and Shah).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial determinants of health significantly affect health outcomes, yet are infrequently addressed in prenatal care.

objectiveThis study aimed to improve the efficiency and experience of addressing social needs in pregnancy through: (1) testing a digital short-form screening tool; and (2) characterizing pregnant people's preferences for social needs screening and management. STUDY

designWe developed a digital short-form social determinants of health screening tool from PRAPARE (Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients' Assets, Risks, and Experiences), and a survey to query patients' preferences for addressing social needs. Instruments were administered online to peripartum participants, with equal representation of patients with public and private insurance. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the short-form tool vs PRAPARE. Quantitative responses were characterized using descriptive statistics. Free-text responses were analyzed with matrix and thematic coding. Survey data were analyzed by subgroups of historically marginalized populations.

resultsA total of 215 people completed the survey. Participants were predominantly White (167; 77.7%) and multiparous (145; 67.4%). Unmet social needs were prevalent with both the short-form tool (77.7%) and PRAPARE (96.7%). The sensitivity (79.3%) and specificity (71.4%) of the short-form screener were high for detecting any social need. Most participants believed that it was important for their pregnancy care team to know their social needs (material: 173, 80.5%; support: 200, 93.0%), and over half felt comfortable sharing their needs through in-person or digital modalities if assistance was or was not available (material: 117, 54.4%; support: 122, 56.7%). Free-text themes reflected considerations for integrating social needs in routine prenatal care. Acceptability of addressing social needs in pregnancy was high among all groups.

conclusionA digital short-form social determinants of health screening tool performs well when compared with the gold standard. Pregnant people accept social needs as a part of routine pregnancy care. Future work is needed to operationalize efficient, effective, patient-centered approaches to addressing social needs in pregnancy.

Indexed as

digital healthdisparitiesfood insecurityhousing insecuritypostpartum careprenatal carepreventive caresocial determinantssocial isolationsocial needstelemedicinetransportation barriers

Identifiers

PMID36922957
PMCPMC10009524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.