ArticleJournal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association2024
Utility of a Pediatric Psychosocial Screener in an Outpatient Burn Clinic.
Article in Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Psychosocial concerns are common among youth who sustained a burn injury. Detecting psychosocial distress early is essential to ensure appropriate treatment and referrals. Thus far, research has focused largely on the long-term outcomes of pediatric burn survivors. The current quality improvement initiative details the implementation and outcomes of brief, pragmatic screening to assess psychosocial concerns among pediatric burn survivors in an outpatient setting. A primary caregiver completed an age-appropriate psychosocial screener for youth aged 4-10 years (n = 69), while patients aged 11-17 years (n = 72) completed a self-report screener. Total scores were used to categorize patients as acute risk (i.e., emotional concerns requiring immediate attention), moderate risk (i.e., elevated symptoms, but no immediate safety concerns), or low risk (i.e., endorsing few to no symptoms). Patients with acute risk were evaluated by medical staff to determine the need for immediate psychiatric intervention or social services referrals. Patients with moderate risk met with the on-site psychology team during their clinic visit or were contacted by telephone within 1 week. Patients in the low-risk category warranted no additional follow-up post-screening. Most patients scored in the low-risk category (n = 120; 85%), while 11% (n = 16) and 4% (n = 5) endorsed symptoms consistent with moderate and acute risk, respectively. Results demonstrate the utility of implementing pediatric psychosocial screening in an outpatient burn clinic, the importance of detecting psychosocial concerns in this context, and usage of referrals to address concerns. Findings also shed light on key caveats of psychosocial screening, barriers to accessing psychosocial support, and the potential benefits of embedded psychological support during medical visits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.