Cited by 2Child and Adolescent HealthHealth Policy Implementation ScienceEmergency and Acute Care Studies

A Health Navigator intervention to address the unmet social needs of caregivers of hospitalised children in South Australia: Protocol for a mixed-methods pilot study

Open access
Neadley, Kate Emily, Downes, Maeve, Chan, Lily, Poirier, Brianna, Lynch, John, Boyd, Mark, Shoubridge, Cheryl·2025·Pilot and Feasibility Studies

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Interventions that identify patients' unmet social needs and provide referrals to government and community resources are growing rapidly across healthcare settings. In Australia, research is limited. This protocol paper presents the methodology for a pilot study assessing the feasibility and acceptability of integrating a Health Navigator (HN) intervention into an inpatient paediatric setting that serves a socially disadvantaged population in South Australia. METHODS: We will conduct a mixed-methods feasibility and acceptability study of a HN intervention designed to respond to the unmet social needs identified by caregivers of children admitted to the Children's Ward of the Lyell McEwin Hospital. We will recruit a maximum of 60 participants over a three-month recruitment period, to be assisted by two HNs over a four-month follow-up period. Our primary feasibility outcomes are rates of 1) intervention recruitment, 2) intervention retention and 3) intervention completion. We have selected a ≥ 80% threshold for feasibility success across all outcomes. Feasibility and acceptability will also be assessed using focus groups with clinicians, participants and community service providers, to explore barriers and enablers to integrating the HN intervention in the ward setting. Secondary outcomes include screening rates for unmet social needs, changes in participants' unmet social needs pre/post-HN intervention and participant satisfaction with the HN service. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the understanding of how HN interventions establish holistic 'community-facing' hospitals, connecting vulnerable populations to appropriate resources for the enhancement of participants' overall health and wellbeing. Our feasibility and acceptability data will inform the design of future trials, as we refine the HN intervention to better suit the needs of socially disadvantaged populations in South Australia. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 1, date 23/01/2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (registration ID: ACTRN12624000494538).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s40814-025-01702-9

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Caregivers in Alberta, like those across Canada and in most countries, remain the de facto system navigators, often acting as case managers without training or support.

    “Caregivers in Alberta, like those across Canada and in most countries, remain the de facto system navigators [4,29,30].”

    From Home care comparison (2026) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Background and Methods (pages unavailable) describe a proposed Health Navigator intervention for caregivers of hospitalised children in South Australia. They do not say that caregivers in Alberta, across Canada, or in most countries are de facto system navigators, or that they act as case managers without training or support. Searches for those terms and for caregivers navigating services independently found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [25]Massar RE, Berry CA, Paul MM. Social needs screening and referral in pediatric primary care clinics: a multiple case study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022. 10.1186/s12913-022-08692-x. 36397075 PMC9673422 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Neadley, K. E., Downes, M., Chan, L., Poirier, B., Lynch, J., Boyd, M., & Shoubridge, C.
Affiliations
  • Adelaide University (AU)
  • SA Health (AU)
Corresponding author
Neadley, Kate Emily
Venue
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
Published
2025-09-26
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
119-119
ISSN
2055-5784 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4414554892
Cited by
2
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pilot and Feasibility Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Hospital Research Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Child and Adolescent Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
Keywords
health navigators, unmet social needs, pediatric hospitalization, disadvantaged groups, feasibility and acceptability, social determinants of health, hospital inpatient ward, resource referral, South Australia

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