Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38015502›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Patient and Care Team Perspectives on Social Determinants of Health Screening in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.

A Caroline Rudisill, Meredith G A Eicken, Deeksha Gupta, Mark Macauda, Stella Self, Ann Blair Kennedy, Darin Thomas, Elise Kao, Mia Jeanty, Jackson Hartley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Food insecurity and hospital resource utilization.Journal of hospital medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Safeguarding Social Determinants of Health Data at a Managed Health Plan.Advances in health information science and practice · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Factors Associated with Documenting Social Determinants of Health in Electronic Health Records.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  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

10 authors.

A Caroline RudisillDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Greenville.
Meredith G A EickenDepartment of Medicine, Prisma Health, Upstate, University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville.
Deeksha GuptaDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Greenville.
Mark MacaudaDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Greenville.
Stella SelfDepartment of Epidemiology/Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Greenville.
Ann Blair KennedyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville.
Darin ThomasAddiction Medicine Center, Prisma Health, Greenville, South Carolina.
Elise KaoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville.
Mia JeantyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville.
Jackson HartleyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Health systems in the US are increasingly screening for social determinants of health (SDOH). However, guidance incorporating stakeholder feedback is limited. Objective: To examine patient and care team experiences in early implementation of SDOH screening in primary care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study included cross-sectional analysis of SDOH screenings during primary care visits from February 22 to May 10, 2022, primary care team member interviews from July 6, 2022, to March 8, 2023, and patient stakeholder engagement on June 30, 2022. The setting was a large southeastern US health care system. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with completed visits in primary care. Exposure: Screening for SDOH in primary care. Main outcomes and Measures: Multivariable logistic regression evaluated patient (eg, age, race and ethnicity) and care team characteristics (eg, practice type), and screening completeness. Interviews contextualized the quantitative analysis. Results: There were 78 928 visits in practices conducting any SDOH screening. The population with visits had a mean (SD) age of 57.6 (18.1) years; 48 086 (60.9%) were female, 12 569 (15.9%) Black, 60 578 (76.8%) White, and 3088 (3.9%) Hispanic. A total of 54 611 visits (69.2%) were with a doctor of medicine and 13 035 (16.5%) with a nurse practitioner. Most had no SDOH questions answered (75 298 [95.4%]) followed by all questions (2976 [3.77%]). Logistic regression analysis found that clinician type, patient race, and primary payer were associated with screening likelihood: for clinician type, nurse practitioner (odds ratio [OR], 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03-0.62; P = .01) and physician assistant (OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.19-8.10; P = .02); for patient race, Asian (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.25-2.28; P = .001); Black (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.10-2.01; P = .009); or 2 or more races (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.12-1.94; P = .006); and for primary payer, Medicaid (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80; P < .001); managed care (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.07-1.29; P = .001); uninsured or with Access Health (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.10-0.67; P = .005), and Tricare (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.92; P = .01). Interview themes included barriers (patient hesitancy, time and resources for screening and referrals, and number of questions/content overlap) and facilitators (communication, practice champions, and support for patient needs). Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study presents potential guidance regarding factors that could improve SDOH screening within busy clinical workflows.

Indexed as

Primary Health CareSocial Determinants of HealthCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleOdds RatioPatient Care TeamUnited States

Identifiers

PMID38015502
PMCPMC10685887

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.