Cited by 11Electronic Health Records SystemsHealthcare Systems and TechnologySocial Policies and Healthcare Reform

Addressing health-related social needs through systematic screening and integration of a social care technology platform

McPeek Hinz, Eugenia R., Avery, Carolyn, Johnson, Sara, Drake, Connor, Spratt, Susan E.·2023·NEJM Catalyst

Abstract

SummaryDuke Health successfully implemented systematic screening for health-related social needs (HRSNs) and NCCARE360, a social care referral network and technology platform, within its electronic health record (EHR). Using a tandem strategy of discrete HRSN identification (screening) and then referral placement, Duke Health increased overall identification of patient HRSNs and the ability to track outcomes of referrals. Using flexible point-of-care screening workflows led to effective and sustained HRSN screening, averaging 8,500 patients per month across 32 ambulatory clinics and inpatient encounters over 18 months. Duke Health negotiated an enterprise-wide license of NCCARE360 to permit all EHR users to place and view referrals to community and government resources rather than limiting the referral function to its social workers. Distributing the work across clinical roles and leveraging the EHR integration to screen and refer, Duke Health attained a tenfold higher referral rate than peer North Carolina institutions that were also using NCCARE360. Clinical locations with dedicated support staff, such as a population health nurse trained in social resource allocation, were more successful in placing initial referrals. Duke Health recognized a need for a human connector to facilitate follow-up for service navigation and verification of referral completion.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/cat.22.0324

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • Without robust evidence, differing clinical processes for food insecurity screening have emerged nationwide, from automated EHR-based screening and referrals to in-person care navigators.

    “In the absence of robust evidence, differing clinical processes have emerged nationwide, ranging from entirely automated FI screening and referrals, including those that leverage electronic health record (EHR) capabilities, to those that rely on inperson care navigators to facilitate connection to clinic-based and community resources.10,11”
  • Online referral platforms that both refer to community-based organizations and complete follow-up are seen in the literature as a promising innovation.

    “Few leveraged online referral platforms to both refer to CBOs and complete follow-up, which are seen in the literature as a promising innovation.10,11”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McPeek Hinz, E. R., Avery, C., Johnson, S., Drake, C., & Spratt, S. E.
Affiliations
  • Associate Chief of Medical Information, Duke University Health System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
  • Duke University (US)
  • Duke University Health System (US)
Venue
NEJM Catalyst
Published
2023-04-19
Volume
4
Issue
5
ISSN
2642-0007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4366438880
Cited by
11
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4
FWCI
2.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
NEJM Catalyst (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Social Policies and Healthcare Reform
Keywords
health-related social needs, systematic screening, electronic health record integration, social resource allocation, service navigation, outpatient clinics, inpatient encounters

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