Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36976611›Full record

ReviewThe western journal of emergency medicine2023

2021 SAEM Consensus Conference Proceedings: Research Priorities for Implementing Emergency Department Screening for Social Risks and Needs.

Mackensie Yore, Callan Elswick Fockele, Herbert C Duber, Kelly M Doran, Richelle J Cooper, Michelle P Lin, Steffani Campbell, Vidya Eswaran, Betty Chang, Haeyeon Hong and 3 more

Full text readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

13 authors.

Mackensie YoreVA Los Angeles and UCLA National Clinician Scholars Program, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System HSR&D Center of Innovation, Los Angeles, California.
Callan Elswick FockeleUniversity of Washington, Department of Emergency Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Herbert C DuberUniversity of Washington, Department of Emergency Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Kelly M DoranNYU Grossman School of Medicine, Departments of Emergency Medicine and Population Health, New York, New York.
Richelle J CooperUCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA Department of Emergency Medicine, Los Angeles, California.
Michelle P LinStanford University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Stanford, California.
Steffani CampbellUCSF Fresno, Department of Emergency Medicine, Fresno, California.
Vidya EswaranBaylor College of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine and Section of Health Services Research, Department of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Betty ChangColumbia University, Department of Emergency Medicine, New York, New York.
Haeyeon HongBoston Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kessiena GbenedioColumbia University, Department of Emergency Medicine, New York, New York.
Kimberly A StanfordUniversity of Chicago, Section of Emergency Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Nicholas GavinMount Sinai Icahn School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, New York, New York.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite literature on a variety of social risks and needs screening interventions in emergency department (ED) settings, there is no universally accepted or evidence-based process for conducting such interventions. Many factors hamper or promote implementation of social risks and needs screening in the ED, but the relative impact of these factors and how best to mitigate/leverage them is unknown.

methodsDrawing on an extensive literature review, expert assessment, and feedback from participants in the 2021 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference through moderated discussions and follow-up surveys, we identified research gaps and rated research priorities for implementing screening for social risks and needs in the ED. We identified three main knowledge gaps: 1) screening implementation mechanics; 2) outreach and engagement with communities; and 3) addressing barriers and leveraging facilitators to screening. Within these gaps, we identified 12 high-priority research questions as well as research methods for future studies.

resultsConsensus Conference participants broadly agreed that social risks and needs screening is generally acceptable to patients and clinicians and feasible in an ED setting. Our literature review and conference discussion identified several research gaps in the specific mechanics of screening implementation, including screening and referral team composition, workflow, and use of technology. Discussions also highlighted a need for more collaboration with stakeholders in screening design and implementation. Additionally, discussions identified the need for studies using adaptive designs or hybrid effectiveness-implementation models to test multiple strategies for implementation and sustainability.

conclusionThrough a robust consensus process we developed an actionable research agenda for implementing social risks and needs screening in EDs. Future work in this area should use implementation science frameworks and research best practices to further develop and refine ED screening for social risks and needs and to address barriers as well as leverage facilitators to such screening.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchResearch DesignEmergency Service, HospitalEvidence GapsHumans

Identifiers

PMID36976611
PMCPMC10047739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read2
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.