The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Adequate Care Coordination is Associated with Reduced Unmet Mental Health Needs for Children
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1007/s10560-026-01101-w · Paper page
Abstract
Children with special healthcare needs (CSHCN), especially those with mental health needs, often receive services from multiple service sectors, including schools. Thus, care coordination may play a critical role in access to mental health care for these children. This pooled cross-sectional study used multivariable logistic regression with data from the National Survey of Children’s Health (2020-2023), focusing on a subsample of children with caregiver-reported mental health problems and need for mental healthcare. It estimates the prevalence of parent-reported need for and receipt of effective care coordination and provider communication with schools. It also measures the association between parent-reported receipt of these services with unmet need for mental healthcare. Most caregivers reported need for care coordination (51.3%) and provider communication with schools (60.7%). Among those with need, 48.3% reported not having their care coordination needs met, and 57.2% of families reported unmet need for provider communication with schools. The probability of reported unmet mental health needs was 12 percentage points lower when children had all needs for care coordination met and 10 points lower when providers communicated with schools. Results suggest that having care coordination needs met and provider communication with schools may play an important role in children accessing needed mental healthcare.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Graaf, G., Gigli, K., Hughes, P., & Thomas, K.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
- Binghamton University (US)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Corresponding author
- Graaf, Genevieve
- Venue
- Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal
- Published
- 2025-11-20
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1295-1302
- ISSN
- 0738-0151 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC13427786
- OpenAlex
- W7140164696
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- The Open Repository - Binghamton (Binghamton University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (K01MH129991)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Adolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Child and Adolescent Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Keywords
- care coordination, unmet mental health needs, children with special health care needs, school-based mental health services, access to mental health care, National Survey of Children's Health
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