Cited by 51Health disparities and outcomesPublic Health and Social InequalitiesHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention

Assessing Area-Level Deprivation as a Proxy for Individual-Level Social Risks

Brown, Erika M., Franklin, Stephanie M., Ryan, Jessica L., Canterberry, Melanie, Bowe, Andy, Pantell, Matt S., Cottrell, Erika K., Gottlieb, Laura M.·2023·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Introduction Concerns about the opportunity costs of social screening initiatives have led some healthcare organizations to consider using social deprivation indices (area-level social risks) as proxies for self-reported needs (individual-level social risks). Yet, little is known about the effectiveness of such substitutions across different populations. Methods This analysis explores how well the highest quartile (cold spot) of three different area-level social risk measures-the Social Deprivation Index, Area Deprivation Index, and Neighborhood Stress Score-corresponds with six individual-level social risks and three risk combinations among a national sample of Medicare Advantage members (N=77,503). Data were derived from area-level measures and cross-sectional survey data collected between October 2019 and February 2020. Agreement between individual and individual-level social risks, sensitivity values, specificity values, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values was calculated for all measures in summer/fall 2022. Results Agreement between area and individual-level social risks ranged from 53% to 77%. Sensitivity for each risk and risk category never exceeded 42%; specificity values ranged from 62% to 87%. Positive predictive values ranged from 8% to 70%, and negative predictive values ranged from 48% to 93%. There were modest performance discrepancies across area-level measures. Conclusions These findings provide additional evidence that area-level depri…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2023.06.006

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, E. M., Franklin, S. M., Ryan, J. L., Canterberry, M., Bowe, A., Pantell, M. S., Cottrell, E. K., & Gottlieb, L. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Humana (United States) (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
Brown, Erika M.
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-12
Volume
65
Issue
6
Pages
1163-1171
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4380151643
Cited by
51
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 1
FWCI
13.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Kaiser Permanente (20210883)
  • National Institutes of Health (L40HD106442)
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (77959)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Keywords
social risk screening, social deprivation index, Area Deprivation Index, proxy validity, social determinants of health
MeSH terms
Social Deprivation, Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Health Facilities, Medicare, Humans, Risk-Taking, United States, Policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review