Screening Adolescents for Sensitive Health Topics in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Davis M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9038619 | biostudies-literature | 2022 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Screening Adolescents for Sensitive Health Topics in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.
Davis Molly M Hoskins Katelin K Phan Mary M Hoffacker Carlin C Reilly Megan M Fugo Perrin B PB Young Jami F JF Beidas Rinad S RS
The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine 20211223 5
We sought to aggregate common barriers and facilitators to screening adolescents for sensitive health topics (e.g., depression, chlamydia) in primary care, as well as those that are unique to a given health topic. We conducted a literature search of three databases (PsycInfo, MEDLINE, and CINAHL) and reference lists of included articles. Studies focused on barriers and facilitators to screening adolescents (ages 12-17 years) for sensitive health topics in primary care that are recommended by nat ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIntegrated people-centred health services (IPCHS) are vital for ensuring comprehensive care towards achieving universal health coverage (UHC). The World Health Organisation (WHO) envisions IPCHS in delivery and access to health services. This scoping review aimed to synthesize available evidence on people-centred primary health care (PHC) and primary care.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of published literature on people-centred PHC. We searched eight databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) using search terms related to people-centred and integrated PHC/primary care services. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist to select studies. We analyzed data and generated themes using Gale's framework thematic analysis method. Themes were explained under five components of the WHO IPCHS framework.ResultsA total of fifty-two studies were included in the review; most were from high-income countries (HICs), primarily focusing on patient-centred primary care. Themes under each component of the framework included: engaging and empowering people and communities (engagement of community, empowerment and empathy); strengthening governance and accountability (organizational leadership, and mutual accountability); reorienting the model of care (residential care, care for multimorbidity, participatory care); coordinating services within and across sectors (partnership with stakeholders and sectors, and coordination of care); creating an enabling environment and funding support (flexible management for change; and enabling environment).ConclusionsSeveral people-centred PHC and primary care approaches are implemented in HICs but have little priority in low-income countries. Potential strategies for people-centred PHC could be engaging end users in delivering integrated care, ensuring accountability, and implementing a residential model of care in coordination with communities. Flexible management options could create an enabling environment for strengthening health systems to deliver people-centred PHC services.
| S-EPMC10633931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAutism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder that manifests itself in early childhood. Early diagnosis of these disorders allows for the initiation of early therapy, which is crucial for the child's further functioning in society.ObjectivesThis review aims to gather and present the existing ASD screening tools that can be used in primary care and adapted to different countries conditions linguistically and culturally.Eligibility criteriaWe searched for English-language publications on ASD screening tools for children aged 0-3 years suitable for use in primary care (i.e. free, requiring no additional training or qualifications).Sources of evidenceFour databases were explored to find English studies on ASD screening tools intended for the rapid assessment of children aged 0-3.Charting methodsThe information sought (specific features of the questionnaires relevant to primary health care workers, psychometric and diagnostic values of a given cultural adaptation of screening tools, and the linguistic and cultural changes made) were extracted and collected to create profiles of these tools.ResultsWe found 81 studies which met inclusion criteria and underwent full data extraction. Three additional data sources were included. These allowed to create 75 profiles of adaptations for 26 different screening tools and collect data on their psychometric values and characteristic features.ConclusionsThe results of our study indicate the availability of several diagnostic tools for early ASD screening in primary care setting concordant culturally and linguistically with a given population. They could be an effective method of accelerating the diagnostic process and starting personalized therapy faster. However, most tools have significant limitations - some are only available for research purposes, while others do not have scientific evidence to prove their effectiveness.
| S-EPMC8925080 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocial determinants of health (SDH) have been shown to be predictors of health outcomes. Integrating SDH screening tools into primary care may help identify individuals or groups with a greater burden of social vulnerability and promote health equity.ObjectiveThis study aimed (1) to identify the existing screening tools to assess social deprivation in adults in primary care settings; (2) to describe the characteristics of these tools and, where appropriate, their psychometric properties; (3) to describe their validity and reliability in those scales in which validation processes have been conducted; and (4) to identify evidence gaps and provide recommendations for future research.MethodsThis study protocol was structured according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Furthermore, since not all SDH assessment tools are published as scientific papers, we will use a slightly modified form of the scoping review framework to retrieve specific information about specific tools for screening SDH in primary care contexts. The following electronic databases will be searched by 2 reviewers: MEDLINE (via PubMed), CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, and Scopus. In addition, the following sources will also be searched for gray literature: DART-Europe E-thesis Portal, OpenGrey, and Google Scholar. After the revision of inclusion and exclusion criteria, the titles, abstracts, and full text of the included studies will be separately screened by 2 reviewers. A PRISMA-ScR flowchart will be used to depict the sources of evidence screened, and data charting will be used to gain in-depth knowledge. The findings of the scoping review will be presented in both narrative and tabular formats, summarizing the existing literature on tools used for SDH in primary care settings. A critical analysis will be undertaken to address the variability in tool validation, cultural adaptability, and integration into different health care systems. Finally, key gaps in the existing evidence will be explored, and research priorities will be proposed, emphasizing the need for screening tools that are culturally sensitive, scalable, and easily integrated into primary care workflows. This critically appraised information may be useful for implementing SDH screening tools in primary care settings and may contribute to future research addressing feasibility and validation studies in different primary health care systems.ResultsThe study began in July 2024. Data collection is expected to be completed in April 2025, with publication expected in October 2025.ConclusionsThis scoping review will provide a comprehensive and critical description of the available tools aimed at screening SDH in primary care settings. Incorporating these tools into routine care has been recognized as a key strategy for addressing health inequalities, given the growing evidence base on the influence of SDH on health outcomes.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/68668.
| S-EPMC11888013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimLow- and middle-income countries represent nearly 85% of all cervical cancer cases worldwide; thereby, it is extremely important to identify methods to improve the screening process. Therefore, this study aimed to summarize the primary characteristics of studies on accessibility, coverage, patient preferences, and factors associated with patient satisfaction or acceptance of colposcopy in primary healthcare.MethodsA search strategy, based on MeSH, Emtree, and free terms, was run through 5 databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Ovid/Medline, and Web of Science). EndNote 20.1 © and Rayyan QCRI © were used for screening. A preset datasheet was used for data extraction.ResultsThe systematic search retrieved 1127 references, and after removing duplicates, screening the titles and abstracts, and reviewing the full text, 7 studies were included. The interrater reliability was 77.73% (kappa statistic = 0.1842). Most studies estimated the proportion of women that sought for colposcopy after a previous screening test for human papilloma virus. One study identifies barriers to colposcopy examination in women at risk of developing cervical cancer. Three studies assessed the decentralization of colposcopy from a tertiary healthcare center to a primary care center. Pap smear was the most common first-line screening test, followed by liquid-based cytology sample and visual inspection with acetic acid.ConclusionOnly a few countries have investigated the use of colposcopy in primary care. Thus, barriers and the care structure for this implementation to be successful in reducing cervical cancer incidence and mortality should be identified.
| S-EPMC10517605 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare coordination and continuity of care conceptualize all care providers and organizations involved in health care to ensure the right care at the right time. However, systematic evidence synthesis is lacking in the care coordination of health services. This scoping review synthesizes evidence on different levels of care coordination of primary health care (PHC) and primary care.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of published evidence on healthcare coordination. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched until 30 November 2022 for studies that describe care coordination/continuity of care in PHC and primary care. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to select studies. We analysed data using a thematic analysis approach and explained themes adopting a multilevel (individual, organizational, and system) analytical framework.ResultsA total of 56 studies were included in the review. Most studies were from upper-middle-income or high-income countries, primarily focusing on continuity/care coordination in primary care. Ten themes were identified in care coordination in PHC/primary care. Four themes under care coordination at the individual level were the continuity of services, linkage at different stages of health conditions (from health promotion to rehabilitation), health care from a life-course (conception to elderly), and care coordination of health services at places (family to hospitals). Five themes under organizational level care coordination included interprofessional, multidisciplinary services, community collaboration, integrated care, and information in care coordination. Finally, a theme under system-level care coordination was related to service management involving multisectoral coordination within and beyond health systems.ConclusionsContinuity and coordination of care involve healthcare provisions from family to health facility throughout the life-course to provide a range of services. Several issues could influence multilevel care coordination, including at the individual (services or users), organizational (providers), and system (departments and sectors) levels. Health systems should focus on care coordination, ensuring types of care per the healthcare needs at different stages of health conditions by a multidisciplinary team. Coordinating multiple technical and supporting stakeholders and sectors within and beyond health sector is also vital for the continuity of care especially in resource-limited health systems and settings.
| S-EPMC10339603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLearning health systems have been gaining traction over the past decade. The purpose of this study was to understand the spread of learning health systems in primary care, including where they have been implemented, how they are operating, and potential challenges and solutions.MethodsWe completed a scoping review by systematically searching OVID Medline®, Embase®, IEEE Xplore®, and reviewing specific journals from 2007 to 2020. We also completed a Google search to identify gray literature.ResultsWe reviewed 1924 articles through our database search and 51 articles from other sources, from which we identified 21 unique learning health systems based on 62 data sources. Only one of these learning health systems was implemented exclusively in a primary care setting, where all others were integrated health systems or networks that also included other care settings. Eighteen of the 21 were in the United States. Examples of how these learning health systems were being used included real-time clinical surveillance, quality improvement initiatives, pragmatic trials at the point of care, and decision support. Many challenges and potential solutions were identified regarding data, sustainability, promoting a learning culture, prioritization processes, involvement of community, and balancing quality improvement versus research.ConclusionsWe identified 21 learning health systems, which all appear at an early stage of development, and only one was primary care only. We summarized and provided examples of integrated health systems and data networks that can be considered early models in the growing global movement to advance learning health systems in primary care.
| S-EPMC8223335 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: This scoping review identifies and details the scope of practice of health professionals who provide palliative care within the primary health setting in Australia. Methods: A scoping review approach was conducted on the Cinahl (Ebsco), Scopus, Medline (Ovid) and PubMed databases to extract articles from 1 December 2015 to 1 December 2020. Broad text words and MeSH headings were used with relevance to palliative care, general practice, primary health, and community setting. Extracted journal articles were limited to those based on the Australian population or Australian health system. Results: Eighty-four papers met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The review identified the following health professional roles within the Primary Health Care setting undertaking palliative care: General Practitioner, Nurse, Pharmacist, Paramedics, Carers, and Allied Health professionals. Conclusion: This review offers a first understanding of the individual health professional roles and multidisciplinary team approach to actively providing palliative care within the Primary Health Care setting in Australia.
| S-EPMC9485459 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGiven the challenges of governments to deliver primary health care (PHC), engaging private sector in the form of public-private partnership (PPP) can be effective policy. The aim of present study is to review the experiences of implementing PPP policy in PHC.MethodsThis scoping review study was conducted in 2019 using the framework proposed by Arkesy and O'Malley. Required data were collected through search the related keywords in databases, manual search of some journals, websites, and other sources of information and through references check, from January 2000 to May 2019. All studies, which focused on the results of PPP in PHC, and published in English or Persian were included in the study.ResultsA total of 108 articles were included in the study. The studies were mostly conducted in low- and middle-income countries. The quantitative studies have demonstrated the success of this policy in improving PHC indicators. Based on the qualitative studies PPP in PHC has many benefits, including access improvement, economic benefits, and service quality enhancement.ConclusionsThe present study provides useful information on the experiences of different countries in the field of PPP in PHC that can be used by experts and decision makers to decide whether to engage the private sector in the form of PPP model.
| S-EPMC7453464 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDisease prevention is a central aspect of primary care practice and is comprised of primary (eg, vaccinations), secondary (eg, screenings), tertiary (eg, chronic condition monitoring), and quaternary (eg, prevention of overmedicalization) levels. Despite rapid digital transformation of primary care practices, digital health interventions (DHIs) in preventive care have yet to be systematically evaluated.ObjectiveThis review aimed to identify and describe the scope and use of current DHIs for preventive care in primary care settings.MethodsA scoping review to identify literature published from 2014 to 2020 was conducted across multiple databases using keywords and Medical Subject Headings terms covering primary care professionals, prevention and care management, and digital health. A subgroup analysis identified relevant studies conducted in US primary care settings, excluding DHIs that use the electronic health record (EHR) as a retrospective data capture tool. Technology descriptions, outcomes (eg, health care performance and implementation science), and study quality as per Oxford levels of evidence were abstracted.ResultsThe search yielded 5274 citations, of which 1060 full-text articles were identified. Following a subgroup analysis, 241 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily examined DHIs among health information technologies, including EHRs (166/241, 68.9%), clinical decision support (88/241, 36.5%), telehealth (88/241, 36.5%), and multiple technologies (154/241, 63.9%). DHIs were predominantly used for tertiary prevention (131/241, 54.4%). Of the core primary care functions, comprehensiveness was addressed most frequently (213/241, 88.4%). DHI users were providers (205/241, 85.1%), patients (111/241, 46.1%), or multiple types (89/241, 36.9%). Reported outcomes were primarily clinical (179/241, 70.1%), and statistically significant improvements were common (192/241, 79.7%). Results were summarized across the following 5 topics for the most novel/distinct DHIs: population-centered, patient-centered, care access expansion, panel-centered (dashboarding), and application-driven DHIs. The quality of the included studies was moderate to low.ConclusionsPreventive DHIs in primary care settings demonstrated meaningful improvements in both clinical and nonclinical outcomes, and across user types; however, adoption and implementation in the US were limited primarily to EHR platforms, and users were mainly clinicians receiving alerts regarding care management for their patients. Evaluations of negative results, effects on health disparities, and many other gaps remain to be explored.
| S-EPMC8817213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) predictive models in primary health care have the potential to enhance population health by rapidly and accurately identifying individuals who should receive care and health services. However, these models also carry the risk of perpetuating or amplifying existing biases toward diverse groups. We identified a gap in the current understanding of strategies used to assess and mitigate bias in primary health care algorithms related to individuals' personal or protected attributes.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the attempts, strategies, and methods used to mitigate bias in AI models within primary health care, to identify the diverse groups or protected attributes considered, and to evaluate the results of these approaches on both bias reduction and AI model performance.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review following Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines, searching Medline (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (Ovid), and Web of Science databases for studies published between January 1, 2017, and November 15, 2022. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, applied selection criteria, and performed full-text screening. Discrepancies regarding study inclusion were resolved by consensus. Following reporting standards for AI in health care, we extracted data on study objectives, model features, targeted diverse groups, mitigation strategies used, and results. Using the mixed methods appraisal tool, we appraised the quality of the studies.ResultsAfter removing 585 duplicates, we screened 1018 titles and abstracts. From the remaining 189 full-text articles, we included 17 studies. The most frequently investigated protected attributes were race (or ethnicity), examined in 12 of the 17 studies, and sex (often identified as gender), typically classified as "male versus female" in 10 of the studies. We categorized bias mitigation approaches into four clusters: (1) modifying existing AI models or datasets, (2) sourcing data from electronic health records, (3) developing tools with a "human-in-the-loop" approach, and (4) identifying ethical principles for informed decision-making. Algorithmic preprocessing methods, such as relabeling and reweighing data, along with natural language processing techniques that extract data from unstructured notes, showed the greatest potential for bias mitigation. Other methods aimed at enhancing model fairness included group recalibration and the application of the equalized odds metric. However, these approaches sometimes exacerbated prediction errors across groups or led to overall model miscalibrations.ConclusionsThe results suggest that biases toward diverse groups are more easily mitigated when data are open-sourced, multiple stakeholders are engaged, and during the algorithm's preprocessing stage. Further empirical studies that include a broader range of groups, such as Indigenous peoples in Canada, are needed to validate and expand upon these findings.Trial registrationOSF Registry osf.io/9ngz5/; https://osf.io/9ngz5/.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/46684.
| S-EPMC11751650 | biostudies-literature