ArticleThe Permanente journal2026
Exploring Patient Preferences for Adverse Childhood Experiences Education in the Primary Care Setting: A Focus Group Study.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough the long-term effects of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are well studied, there is a lack of literature about how patients understand and prefer to discuss these issues in health care settings. This qualitative study explored patients' knowledge of ACEs, their preferences for learning about the health effects of trauma, and their perspectives on integrating ACEs education, including patient education posters, into primary care visits.
methodsTwo focus groups were conducted with 8 patients at an internal medicine clinic in the midwestern United States. Discussions were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using inductive thematic content analysis to identify key themes related to health literacy, patient preferences for ACEs screening and discussions in clinical care, and reactions to ACEs educational posters.
resultsThree main themes emerged: 1) understanding of ACEs, including varying levels of health literacy and familiarity with the concept; 2) preferences for learning about ACEs, with participants emphasizing the importance of optional screening and trauma-informed communication; and 3) responses to posters, where infographic-style posters were viewed as effective conversation starters but required careful attention to language, imagery, and inclusivity.
conclusionsPatients were willing to engage in discussions about ACEs during primary care visits when approached with compassion and expertise. Findings highlight the need to tailor communication strategies to individual readiness and literacy levels. Incorporating patient feedback into ACEs education and screening processes may enhance trust, improve patient-clinician relationships, and support holistic care.
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.