Screening for comprehensive social needs in patients with cancer: a narrative review.

IF 4.1 Q2 ONCOLOGY JNCI Cancer Spectrum Pub Date : 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1093/jncics/pkaf012
Isabel Arana, Raymond Liu, Lawrence Kushi, Erin Hahn, Meera Ragavan
{"title":"Screening for comprehensive social needs in patients with cancer: a narrative review.","authors":"Isabel Arana, Raymond Liu, Lawrence Kushi, Erin Hahn, Meera Ragavan","doi":"10.1093/jncics/pkaf012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with cancer who report social needs have worse quality of life, lower health-care access, and suboptimal health outcomes. However, screening for social needs does not happen systematically, and successful screening tools, strategies, and workflows have seldom been described. The downstream effects of screening including resource navigation have also not been well characterized. The objective of this narrative review was to fill these gaps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two investigators searched PubMed and Embase for studies that implemented a patient-facing social screening tool among patients with cancer between 2008 and 2023 using search terms including social screening, social  needs, and cancer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 19 articles that met study inclusion criteria. The most common tool used was the validated Health Leads Social Toolkit. Most often, screening tools were administered electronically, sent directly to patients, and captured needs at a single time point during a patient's diagnosis. Screening response rates ranged between 10% and 60%. Less than half of the studies described downstream resource navigation for patients who screened positive for social needs. Only 1 study evaluated the impact of screening on clinical outcomes and quality of life. Screening for patients who do not speak English or who belong to historically racial, ethnic, and gender minority groups was limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Screening for social needs has been shown to be feasible across delivery systems with numerous validated tools available. However, gaps remain in generalizability to diverse patient populations. Future work must identify how screening workflows can be successfully incorporated into routine clinical workflows.</p>","PeriodicalId":14681,"journal":{"name":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11917213/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNCI Cancer Spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkaf012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with cancer who report social needs have worse quality of life, lower health-care access, and suboptimal health outcomes. However, screening for social needs does not happen systematically, and successful screening tools, strategies, and workflows have seldom been described. The downstream effects of screening including resource navigation have also not been well characterized. The objective of this narrative review was to fill these gaps.

Methods: Two investigators searched PubMed and Embase for studies that implemented a patient-facing social screening tool among patients with cancer between 2008 and 2023 using search terms including social screening, social  needs, and cancer.

Results: We identified 19 articles that met study inclusion criteria. The most common tool used was the validated Health Leads Social Toolkit. Most often, screening tools were administered electronically, sent directly to patients, and captured needs at a single time point during a patient's diagnosis. Screening response rates ranged between 10% and 60%. Less than half of the studies described downstream resource navigation for patients who screened positive for social needs. Only 1 study evaluated the impact of screening on clinical outcomes and quality of life. Screening for patients who do not speak English or who belong to historically racial, ethnic, and gender minority groups was limited.

Conclusions: Screening for social needs has been shown to be feasible across delivery systems with numerous validated tools available. However, gaps remain in generalizability to diverse patient populations. Future work must identify how screening workflows can be successfully incorporated into routine clinical workflows.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
筛查癌症患者的综合社会需求:一个叙述性的回顾。
背景:报告社会需求的癌症患者生活质量较差,医疗保健可及性较低,健康结果不理想。然而,社会需求的筛查并没有系统地发生,成功的筛查工具、策略和工作流程很少被描述。包括资源导航在内的筛选的下游效应也没有得到很好的表征。这篇叙述性评论的目的就是填补这些空白。方法:两位研究者在Pubmed和Embase检索2008-2023年间在癌症患者中实施面向患者的社会筛查工具的研究,搜索词包括“社会筛查”、“社会需求”和“癌症”。结果:我们确定了19篇符合研究纳入标准的文章。最常用的工具是经过验证的Health Leads Social Toolkit。大多数情况下,筛查工具以电子方式管理,直接发送给患者,并在患者诊断期间的单个时间点捕获需求。筛查反应率在10-60%之间。不到一半的研究描述了社会需求筛查呈阳性的患者的下游资源导航,只有一项研究评估了筛查对临床结果和生活质量的影响。对不会说英语或历史上属于种族、民族和性别少数群体的患者的筛查是有限的。结论:社会需求筛查已被证明是可行的跨交付系统与许多有效的工具可用。然而,在不同患者群体的普遍性方面仍然存在差距。未来的工作必须确定如何将筛查工作流程成功地纳入常规临床工作流程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
JNCI Cancer Spectrum Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Contrastive multimodal deep learning for survival prediction in grade 2/3 gliomas. Digitally engaging participants in cancer clinical trials: Design and pilot of the alliance participant engagement portal (PEP). Effect of a polygenic risk score in patients with late-onset, early-onset, familial, or hereditary colorectal cancer. Cost-effectiveness of an artificial intelligence predictive model for guiding androgen deprivation therapy in intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Artificial intelligence-based multi-modal multi-tasks analysis of thyroid ultrasound image features predicts thyroid cancer: a multicenter study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1