MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413361811 · doi:10.5334/ijic.nacic24034

Capturing Social Determinants of Health using Machine Learning for Integrated Care Program Refinement and Spread

2025· article· en· W4413361811 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntegrated careSocial careHealth careComputer scienceKnowledge managementProcess managementNursingData scienceBusinessMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Social determinants of health (SDOH) such as language preference, health literacy, housing access, food insecurity, social isolation and supports, transportation, depression and addiction, can significantly impact health outcomes and exacerbate disparities surrounding care transitions in and out of hospital. There is growing momentum among healthcare systems to capture SDOH through point-of-care surveys for implementation efforts. However, the sporadic, unstructured nature to these surveys when patients are acutely unwell can lead to low response rates. To be more effective, these efforts can benefit from a systematic approach to capturing SDOH in electronic health records (EHRs). Approach: A comprehensive list of social determinants of health relevant to care transitions was informed based on literature review across different countries then narrowed down to balance feasibility of capture among health records at point of care in two provinces (Ontario and Alberta). A random sample of 3075 charts were then manually reviewed among admitted patients enrolled in integrated care program supporting patients around an acute care admission for these SDOH. Additionally, A specialized keyword list was made to narrow down the search within EHRs. The keywords were selected based on their relevance to the SDOH as highlighted in the literature and based on similar social determinants of health research conducted across other countries. Result: The hospital-level survey (N=3075 of ICP participants) demonstrated poor response and capture of several SDOH, particularly for income-related SDOH. However, the use of chart records (including admission, consultant and other point of care notes) demonstrated feasible and usable capture of key search terms for SDOH. Of the 50 patient charts reviewed so far, 45 individuals had SDOH captured in chart-level records, with the majority of these being related to language barriers and a minority being related to transportation access. Similarly, other SDOH also showed equally low response rates in the survey. These results imply that although it is possible to capture SDOH from electronic health records, existing approaches need significant improvement to become more efficient and scalable. Implication: The use of health care records from clinicians documenting at point-of-care presents a unique opportunity for capturing SDOH in electronic health record systems. Shared learnings from this project will greatly widen institutions with EHRs feasibility and success of capturing SDOH for the evaluation, refinement and spread of integrated care models surrounding acute care admissions. Next steps include collaboration with decision support and analytic teams across Ontario and Calgary to develop machine learning algorithms with the use of natural language processing to perform more extensive data pulls and analytics. This process will also involve implementing the list of keywords that the algorithms will use to improve the accuracy and range of data extraction. These steps would capture a larger and more accurate number of social needs.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Integrated Care→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→