Social Determinants of Health Screening Tools for Adults in Primary Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Research Protocols Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI:10.2196/68668
Julia Martínez-Alfonso, Fernando Sebastian-Valles, Vicente Martinez-Vizcaino, Nuria Jimenez-Olivas, Antonio Cabrera-Majada, Iván De Los Mozos-Hernando, Shkelzen Cekrezi, Héctor Martínez-Martínez, Arthur Eumann Mesas
{"title":"Social Determinants of Health Screening Tools for Adults in Primary Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review.","authors":"Julia Martínez-Alfonso, Fernando Sebastian-Valles, Vicente Martinez-Vizcaino, Nuria Jimenez-Olivas, Antonio Cabrera-Majada, Iván De Los Mozos-Hernando, Shkelzen Cekrezi, Héctor Martínez-Martínez, Arthur Eumann Mesas","doi":"10.2196/68668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social 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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study began in July 2024. Data collection is expected to be completed in April 2025, with publication expected in October 2025.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This 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.</p><p><strong>International registered report identifier (irrid): </strong>PRR1-10.2196/68668.</p>","PeriodicalId":14755,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Research Protocols","volume":"14 ","pages":"e68668"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11888013/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Research Protocols","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/68668","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Social 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.

Objective: This 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.

Methods: This 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.

Results: The study began in July 2024. Data collection is expected to be completed in April 2025, with publication expected in October 2025.

Conclusions: This 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.

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
初级保健成人健康筛查工具的社会决定因素:范围审查方案
背景:健康的社会决定因素(SDH)已被证明是健康结果的预测因素。将SDH筛查工具纳入初级保健可能有助于确定社会脆弱性负担更重的个人或群体,并促进卫生公平。目的:本研究旨在(1)确定现有的筛查工具来评估初级保健机构中成年人的社会剥夺;(2)描述这些工具的特征,并在适当的情况下描述其心理测量特性;(三)在已进行验证的量表中描述其效度和信度;(4)找出证据差距,为今后的研究提供建议。方法:本研究方案根据乔安娜布里格斯研究所的范围评价方法构建,并根据PRISMA-ScR(系统评价和荟萃分析扩展范围评价的首选报告项目)指南进行报告。此外,由于并非所有SDH评估工具都以科学论文的形式发表,我们将使用范围审查框架的稍微修改形式来检索有关初级保健背景下筛查SDH的特定工具的特定信息。以下电子数据库将由2位审稿人检索:MEDLINE(通过PubMed), CINAHL Plus, Web of Science和Scopus。此外,灰色文献还将检索以下来源:DART-Europe E-thesis Portal、OpenGrey和谷歌Scholar。在修订纳入和排除标准后,纳入研究的标题、摘要和全文将由2名审稿人分别筛选。将使用prism - scr流程图来描述筛选的证据来源,并使用数据图表来获得深入的知识。范围审查的结果将以叙述和表格两种形式提出,总结关于初级保健环境中用于SDH的工具的现有文献。将进行批判性分析,以解决工具验证、文化适应性和与不同卫生保健系统的整合方面的可变性。最后,将探讨现有证据中的关键差距,并提出研究重点,强调需要具有文化敏感性、可扩展且易于整合到初级保健工作流程中的筛查工具。这些经过严格评估的信息可能有助于在初级保健机构中实施SDH筛查工具,并可能有助于未来在不同初级卫生保健系统中进行可行性和有效性研究。结果:研究开始于2024年7月。数据收集预计将于2025年4月完成,预计将于2025年10月发布。结论:这一范围审查将提供一个全面和关键的描述,旨在筛查SDH在初级保健机构的可用工具。鉴于越来越多的证据表明可持续发展对健康结果的影响,将这些工具纳入常规护理已被认为是解决健康不平等问题的一项关键战略。国际注册报告标识符(irrid): PRR1-10.2196/68668。
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
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
414
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Efficacy of Cerium Oxide Nanoparticles and Chlorhexidine Gluconate Against Enterococcus faecalis in Root Canal Systems: Protocol for an In Vitro Study. Differentiating the COVID-19 Infection and Vaccine Experiences of Patients With Systemic, Single Organ, and Overlap Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease: Protocol for a Secondary Analysis for Enhancing COVID-19 Vaccine Pharmacovigilance. Comparative Evaluation of AmnioGuard and Advanced Platelet-Rich Fibrin When Combined With NovaBone Putty in the Regeneration of Human Periodontal Infrabony Defects: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Using Textural Analysis of Thermal Imaging to Predict Healing Status of Diabetes-Related Neuropathic Foot Ulcers: Protocol for a Co-Design and Longitudinal Study. Impact of Ocular Massage on Intraocular Pressure and Schlemm Canal Dimensions in Healthy Adults: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.
×
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