Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42873569›Full record

Observational studyJMIR research protocols2026

Systemwide Evaluation of Field Medicine Programs in Los Angeles County: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Longitudinal Observational Study.

Randall Kuhn, Jessie Chien, Irene Del Mastro N, Sonali Saluja, Amanda Landrian Gonzalez, Geoffrey Cui-Naudet, Gisele Corletto, Sara Ozuna, Brian P Zunner-Keating, Catherine M Weaver and 3 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in JMIR research protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Randall KuhnDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, 650 Charles E. Young Dr. South, 16-035 Center for Health Sciences, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, United States, 1 303 928 9111.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5664-6933
Jessie ChienCalifornia Center for Population Research, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4968-2789
Irene Del Mastro NDepartment of Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4681-7310
Sonali SalujaHealthcare in Action, Long Beach, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2750-5821
Amanda Landrian GonzalezUSC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7171-5949
Geoffrey Cui-NaudetUSC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-9390-2106
Gisele CorlettoUSC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-2353-9361
Sara OzunaUSC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-5896-9468
Brian P Zunner-KeatingHomeless Healthcare Collaborative, UCLA Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2039-7696
Catherine M WeaverHomeless Healthcare Collaborative, UCLA Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7254-4662
Coley KingHomeless Services, Venice Family Clinic, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-0862-1955
Charles RobinsonLA Care Health Plan, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-0826-9454
Benjamin F HenwoodUSC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8346-3569

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: People experiencing homelessness face high morbidity and unmet health care needs. To address these gaps, health care providers across the United States are increasingly adopting "field medicine" models that deliver mobile health services in shelters, homeless encampments, mobile clinics, and other community settings. Despite their expanding use, systematic evaluations of field medicine programs remain limited. Objective: This paper aims to describe a protocol for a mixed methods evaluation of field medicine for people experiencing homelessness across Los Angeles (LA) County, California. Methods: People experiencing homelessness receiving field medicine were recruited into an ongoing longitudinal study of LA County's unhoused population; a subset of participants in the existing probability-sampled cohort serves as the comparison group. Using monthly online survey data and a quasi-experimental design, we examine who accesses field medicine, how patients use and perceive care, and the impact of field medicine on health and service engagement. We also conduct participant observation of field medicine teams to document patient-provider interactions, care coordination, and carry out semistructured interviews with providers, patients, and nonpatients. Quantitative survey and qualitative findings will be integrated to identify convergence, complementarity, and explanatory insights. Results: Recruitment of people experiencing homelessness receiving field medicine occurred between August 2024 and October 2025. Among 847 individuals referred from field medicine, 749 (88.4%) were eligible, and 436 (51.5%) completed the first monthly survey and were enrolled. For the comparison group, 902 (63.8%) of the 1413 participants ever enrolled in the existing cohort completed a survey during the field medicine recruitment period and met eligibility criteria. Participant observation included 82 field visits (≈500 h) across diverse service locations and more than 300 patient-clinician interactions. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 15 (30%) providers, 23 (46%) field medicine patients, and 12 (24%) nonpatients. Conclusions: This study represents one of the first large-scale mixed methods evaluations of field medicine. With increasing health threats from criminalization, climate-related events, and other socioenvironmental hazards, field medicine may mitigate health risks and improve systems engagement for people experiencing homelessness. Findings will provide rigorous evidence to inform service delivery and policy decisions.

Indexed as

Ill-Housed PersonsAdultFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesLos AngelesMaleProgram EvaluationSurveys and Questionnairesfield medicinehomelessnesslongitudinal researchmixed methodsstreet medicine

Identifiers

PMID42873569
PMCPMC13664992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.