Dataset Information

Screening Children for Social Determinants of Health: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: CONTEXT:Screening children for social determinants of health (SDOHs) has gained attention in recent years, but there is a deficit in understanding the present state of the science. OBJECTIVE:To systematically review SDOH screening tools used with children, examine their psychometric properties, and evaluate how they detect early indicators of risk and inform care. DATA SOURCES:Comprehensive electronic search of PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science Core Collection. STUDY SELECTION:Studies in which a tool that screened children for multiple SDOHs (defined according to Healthy People 2020) was developed, tested, and/or employed. DATA EXTRACTION:Extraction domains included study characteristics, screening tool characteristics, SDOHs screened, and follow-up procedures. RESULTS:The search returned 6274 studies. We retained 17 studies encompassing 11 screeners. Study samples were diverse with respect to biological sex and race and/or ethnicity. Screening was primarily conducted in clinical settings with a parent or caregiver being the primary informant for all screeners. Psychometric properties were assessed for only 3 screeners. The most common SDOH domains screened included the family context and economic stability. Authors of the majority of studies described referrals and/or interventions that followed screening to address identified SDOHs. LIMITATIONS:Following the Healthy People 2020 SDOH definition may have excluded articles that other definitions would have captured. CONCLUSIONS:The extent to which SDOH screening accurately assessed a child's SDOHs was largely unevaluated. Authors of future research should also evaluate if referrals and interventions after the screening effectively address SDOHs and improve child well-being.

SUBMITTER: Sokol R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6996928 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Screening Children for Social Determinants of Health: A Systematic Review.

Sokol Rebeccah R Austin Anna A Chandler Caroline C Byrum Elizabeth E Bousquette Jessica J Lancaster Christiana C Doss Ginna G Dotson Andrea A Urbaeva Venera V Singichetti Bhavna B Brevard Kanisha K Wright Sarah Towner ST Lanier Paul P Shanahan Meghan M

Pediatrics 20190923 4

<h4>Context</h4>Screening children for social determinants of health (SDOHs) has gained attention in recent years, but there is a deficit in understanding the present state of the science.<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically review SDOH screening tools used with children, examine their psychometric properties, and evaluate how they detect early indicators of risk and inform care.<h4>Data sources</h4>Comprehensive electronic search of PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literatur ...[more]

PMID: 31548335

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceScreening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers in the United States has remained below the Healthy People 2020 goals, with evidence indicating that persistent screening disparities still exist. The US Department of Health and Human Services has emphasized cross-sectoral collaboration in aligning social determinants of health with public health and medical services. Examining the economics of intervening through these novel methods in the realm of cancer screening can inform program planners, health care providers, implementers, and policy makers.ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of interventions leveraging social determinants of health to improve screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer to guide implementation.Evidence reviewA systematic literature search for economic evidence was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Global Health, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, Business Source Complete, EconLit, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), and Sociological Abstracts from January 1, 2004, to November 25, 2019. Included studies intervened on social determinants of health to improve breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in the United States and reported intervention cost, incremental cost per additional person screened, and/or incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Risk of bias was assessed along with qualitative assessment of quality to ensure complete reporting of economic measures, data sources, and analytic methods. In addition, included studies with modeled outcomes had to define structural elements and sources for input parameters, distinguish between programmatic and literature-derived data, and assess uncertainty.FindingsThirty unique articles with 94 706 real and 4.21 million simulated participants satisfied our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The median intervention cost per participant was $123.87 (interquartile interval [IQI], $24.44-$313.19; 34 estimates). The median incremental cost per additional person screened was $250.37 (IQI, $44.67-$609.38; 17 estimates). Studies that modeled final economic outcomes had a median incremental cost per person of $122.96 (IQI, $46.96-$124.80; 5 estimates), a median incremental screening rate of 15% (IQI, 14%-20%; 5 estimates), and a median incremental QALY per person of 0.04 years (IQI, 0.006-0.06 year; 5 estimates). The median incremental cost per QALY gained of $3120.00 (IQI, $782.59-$33 600.00; 5 estimates) was lower than $50 000, an established, conservative threshold of cost-effectiveness.Conclusions and relevanceInterventions focused on social determinants of health to improve breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening appear to be cost-effective for underserved, vulnerable populations in the United States. The increased screening rates were associated with earlier diagnosis and treatment and in improved health outcomes with significant gains in QALYs. These findings represent the latest economic evidence to guide implementation of these interventions, which serve the dual purpose of enhancing health equity and economic efficiency.

Project description:BackgroundVeterans Health Administration (VHA) is committed to providing high-quality care and addressing health disparities for vulnerable Veterans. To meet these goals, VA policymakers need guidance on how to address social determinants in operations planning and day-to-day clinical care for Veterans.MethodMEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts were searched from inception to January 2017. Additional articles were suggested by peer reviewers and/or found through search of work associated with US and VA cohorts. Eligible articles compared Veterans vs non-Veterans, and/or Veterans engaged with those not engaged in VA healthcare. Our evidence maps summarized study characteristics, social determinant(s) addressed, and whether health behaviors, health services utilization, and/or health outcomes were examined. Qualitative syntheses and quality assessment were performed for articles on rurality, trauma exposure, and sexual orientation.ResultsWe screened 7242 citations and found 131 eligible articles-99 compared Veterans vs non-Veterans, and 40 included engaged vs non-engaged Veterans. Most articles were cross-sectional and addressed socioeconomic factors (e.g., education and income). Fewer articles addressed rurality (N?=?20), trauma exposure (N?=?17), or sexual orientation (N?=?2); none examined gender identity. We found no differences in rural residence between Veterans and non-Veterans, nor between engaged and non-engaged Veterans (moderate strength evidence). There was insufficient evidence for role of rurality in health behaviors, health services utilization, or health outcomes. Trauma exposures, including from events preceding military service, were more prevalent for Veterans vs non-Veterans and for engaged vs non-engaged Veterans (low-strength evidence); exposures were associated with smoking (low-strength evidence).DiscussionLittle published literature exists on some emerging social determinants. We found no differences in rural residence between our groups of interest, but trauma exposure was higher in Veterans (vs non-Veterans) and engaged (vs non-engaged). We recommend consistent measures for social determinants, clear conceptual frameworks, and analytic strategies that account for the complex relationships between social determinants and health.

Project description:IntroductionInfectious disease models are important tools to inform public health policy decisions. These models are primarily based on an average population approach and often ignore the role of social determinants in predicting the course of a pandemic and the impact of policy interventions. Ignoring social determinants in models may cause or exacerbate inequalities. This limitation has not been previously explored in the context of the current pandemic, where COVID-19 has been found to disproportionately affect marginalised racial, ethnic and socioeconomic groups. Therefore, our primary goal is to identify the extent to which COVID-19 models incorporate the social determinants of health in predicting outcomes of the pandemic.Methods and analysisWe will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases from December 2019 to August 2020. We will assess all infectious disease modelling studies for inclusion of social factors that meet the following criteria: (a) focused on human spread of SARS-CoV-2; (b) modelling studies; (c) interventional or non-interventional studies; and (d) focused on one of the following outcomes: COVID-19-related outcomes (eg, cases, deaths), non-COVID-19-related outcomes (ie, impacts of the pandemic or control policies on other health conditions or health services), or impact of the pandemic or control policies on economic outcomes. Data will only be extracted from models incorporating social factors. We will report the percentage of models that considered social factors, indicate which social factors were considered, and describe how social factors were incorporated into the conceptualisation and implementation of the infectious disease models. The extracted data will also be used to create a narrative synthesis of the results.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required as only secondary data will be collected. The results of this systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference proceedings.Prospero registration numberCRD42020207706.

Project description:The strategic importance of monitoring social determinants of health (SDH) and health equity and inequity has been a central focus in global discussions around the 2011 Rio Political Declaration on SDH and the Millennium Development Goals. This study is part of the World Health Organization (WHO) equity-oriented analysis of linkages between health and other sectors (EQuAL) project, which aims to define a framework for monitoring SDH and health equity.This review provides a global summary and analysis of the domains and indicators that have been used in recent studies covering the SDH. These studies are considered here within the context of indicators proposed by the WHO EQuAL project. The objectives are as follows: to describe the range of international and national studies and the types of indicators most frequently used; report how they are used in causal explanation of the SDH; and identify key priorities and challenges reported in current research for national monitoring of the SDH.We conducted a scoping review of published SDH studies in the PubMed(®) database to obtain evidence of socio-economic indicators. We evaluated, selected, and extracted data from national scale studies published from 2004 to 2014. The research included papers published in English, Italian, French, Portuguese, and Spanish.The final sample consisted of 96 articles. SDH monitoring is well reported in the scientific literature independent of the economic level of the country and magnitude of deprivation in population groups. The research methods were mostly quantitative and many papers used multilevel and multivariable statistical analyses and indexes to measure health inequalities and SDH. In addition to the usual economic indicators, a high number of socio-economic indicators were used. The indicators covered a broad range of social dimensions, which were given consideration within and across different social groups. Many indicators included in the WHO EQuAL framework were not common in the studies in this review due to their intersectoral and interdisciplinary nature.Our review illustrates that the attention to SDH monitoring has grown in terms of its importance and complexity within the scientific health literature. We identified a need to make indicators more wide-ranging in order to include a broader range of social conditions. The WHO EQuAL framework can provide intersectoral and interdisciplinary means of building a more comprehensive standardised approach to monitoring the SDH and improving equity in health.

Dataset Information

Screening Children for Social Determinants of Health: A Systematic Review.

Publications

Screening Children for Social Determinants of Health: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure