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

IF 3.4 Q2 ONCOLOGY JNCI Cancer Spectrum Pub Date : 2025-01-28 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 healthcare 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. This 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 2008-2023 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 10-60%. Less than half of the studies described downstream resource navigation for patients who screened positive for social needs Only one 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":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","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 healthcare 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. This 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 2008-2023 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 10-60%. Less than half of the studies described downstream resource navigation for patients who screened positive for social needs Only one 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.

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
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
Cancer risk in carriers of TP53 germline variants grouped into different functional categories. Duration of aromatase inhibitor use and long-term cardiovascular risk in breast cancer survivors. Screening for comprehensive social needs in patients with cancer: a narrative review. Tumor localization strategies of multi-cancer early detection tests: a quantitative assessment. Abdominal visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue associations with postmenopausal breast cancer incidence.
×
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:481959085
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