Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38521923›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Technology, data, people, and partnerships in addressing unmet social needs within Medicaid Managed Care.

Rachel Hogg-Graham, Allison M Scott, Emily R Clear, Elizabeth N Riley, Teresa M Waters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. 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. A primer on clinical programs in managed care pharmacy.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Rachel Hogg-GrahamDepartment of Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, 111 Washington Ave, 107B, Lexington, KY, USA. Rachel.hogg@uky.edu.
Allison M ScottDepartment of Communication, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Emily R ClearDepartment of Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, 111 Washington Ave, 107B, Lexington, KY, USA.
Elizabeth N RileyDepartment of Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, 111 Washington Ave, 107B, Lexington, KY, USA.
Teresa M WatersInstitute for Public and Preventive Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.

Funding

Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, Department for Medicaid Services C2517Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Grant ID 77256
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals with unmet social needs experience adverse health outcomes and are subject to greater inequities in health and social outcomes. Given the high prevalence of unmet needs among Medicaid enrollees, many Medicaid managed care organizations (MCOs) are now screening enrollees for unmet social needs and connecting them to community-based organizations (CBOs) with knowledge and resources to address identified needs. The use of screening and referral technology and data sharing are often considered key components in programs integrating health and social services. Despite this emphasis on technology and data collection, research suggests substantial barriers exist in operationalizing effective systems.

methodsWe used qualitative methods to examine cross-sector perspectives on the use of data and technology to facilitate MCO and CBO partnerships in Kentucky, a state with high Medicaid enrollment, to address enrollee social needs. We recruited participants through targeted sampling, and conducted 46 in-depth interviews with 26 representatives from all six Kentucky MCOs and 20 CBO leaders. Qualitative descriptive analysis, an inductive approach, was used to identify salient themes.

resultsWe found that MCOs and CBOs have differing levels of need for data, varying incentives for collecting and sharing data, and differing valuations of what data can or should do. Four themes emerged from interviewees' descriptions of how they use data, including 1) to screen for patient needs, 2) to case manage, 3) to evaluate the effectiveness of programs, and 4) to partner with each other. Underlying these data use themes were areas of alignment between MCOs/CBOs, areas of incongruence, and areas of tension (both practical and ideological). The inability to interface with community partners for data privacy and ownership concerns contributes to division. Our findings suggest a disconnect between MCOs and CBOs regarding terms of their technology interfacing despite their shared mission of meeting the unmet social needs of enrollees.

conclusionsWhile data and technology can be used to identify enrollee needs and determine the most critical need, it is not sufficient in resolving challenges. People and relationships across sectors are vital in connecting enrollees with the community resources to resolve unmet needs.

Indexed as

Managed Care ProgramsMedicaidData CollectionHumansSocial WorkUnited StatesHealth care organizations and systemsManaged care organizationsMedicaidSocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID38521923
PMCPMC10960441

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.