MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215588473 · doi:10.2196/32818

Social Determinants of Health Screening by Preclinical Medical Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Service-Based Learning Case Study

2021· article· en· W3215588473 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tara Herrera, Kevin P. Fiori, Heather Archer‐Dyer, David W. Lounsbury, Judith Wylie‐Rosett

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakService (business)Medical educationMedicineVirologyBusinessInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The inclusion of social determinants of health is mandated for undergraduate medical education. However, little is known about how to prepare preclinical students for real-world screening and referrals for addressing social determinants of health. OBJECTIVE: This pilot project's objective was to evaluate the feasibility of using a real-world, service-based learning approach for training preclinical students to assess social needs and make relevant referrals via the electronic medical record during the COVID-19 pandemic (May to June 2020). METHODS: This project was designed to address an acute community service need and to teach preclinical, second-year medical student volunteers (n=11) how to assess social needs and make referrals by using the 10-item Social Determinants of Health Screening Questionnaire in the electronic health record (EHR; Epic platform; Epic Systems Corporation). Third-year medical student volunteers (n=3), who had completed 6 clinical rotations, led the 2-hour skills development orientation and were available for ongoing mentoring and peer support. All student-patient communication was conducted by telephone, and bilingual (English and Spanish) students called the patients who preferred to communicate in Spanish. We analyzed EHR data extracted from Epic to evaluate screening and data extracted from REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture; Vanderbilt University) to evaluate community health workers' notes. We elicited feedback from the participating preclinical students to evaluate the future use of this community-based service learning approach in our preclinical curriculum. RESULTS: The preclinical students completed 45 screening interviews. Of the 45 screened patients, 20 (44%) screened positive for at least 1 social need. Almost all of these patients (19/20, 95%) were referred to the community health worker. Half (8/16, 50%) of the patients who had consultations with the community health worker were connected with a relevant social service resource. The preclinical students indicated that project participation increased their ability to assess social needs and make needed EHR referrals. Food insecurity was the most common social need. CONCLUSIONS: Practical exposure to social needs assessment has the potential to help preclinical medical students develop the ability to address social concerns prior to entering clinical clerkships in their third year of medical school. The students can also become familiar with the EHR prior to entering third-year clerkships. Physicians, who are aware of social needs and have the electronic medical record tools and staff resources needed to act, can create workflows to make social needs assessments and services integral components of health care. Research studies and quality improvement initiatives need to investigate how to integrate screening for social needs and connecting patients to the appropriate social services into routine primary care procedures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.411 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical EducationSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207