ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Integrating social care into clinical care requires substantial resources. Use of existing data through a geographic information system (GIS) has the potential to support efficient and effective integration of social care into clinical settings. We conducted a scoping literature review characterizing its use in primary care settings to identify and address social risk factors. METHODS: In December 2018, we searched 2 databases and extracted structured data for eligible articles that (1) described the use of GIS in clinical settings to identify and/or intervene on social risks, (2) were published between December 2013 and December 2018, and (3) were based in the United States. Additional studies were identified by examining references. RESULTS: Of the 5,574 articles included for review, 18 met study eligibility criteria: 14 (78%) were descriptive studies, 3 (17%) tested an intervention, and 1 (6%) was a theoretical report. All studies used GIS to identify social risks (increase awareness); 3 studies (17%) described interventions to address social risks, primarily by identifying relevant community resources and aligning clinical services to patients' needs. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies describe associations between GIS and population health outcomes; however, there is a paucity of literature regarding GIS use to identify and address social risk factors in clinical settings. GIS technology may assist health systems seeking to address population health outcomes through alignment and advocacy; its current application in clinical care delivery is infrequent and largely limited to referring patients to local community resources.
Subject(s)
Social Support , Technology , Humans , Databases, FactualABSTRACT
This cross-sectional study describes and compares key characteristics of state COVID-19 vaccine incentive programs in the US.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Medically Underserved Area , MotivationSubject(s)
Hemangiosarcoma/mortality , Hemangiosarcoma/therapy , Soft Tissue Neoplasms/mortality , Soft Tissue Neoplasms/therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hemangiosarcoma/pathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Radiotherapy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Sarcoma/mortality , Sarcoma/pathology , Sarcoma/therapy , Soft Tissue Neoplasms/pathology , Surgical Procedures, Operative/methods , Survival Analysis , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
Student feedback is a valuable asset in curriculum evaluation and improvement, but many institutions have faced challenges implementing it in a meaningful way. In this article, we report the rationale, process and impact of the Student Curriculum Review Team (SCRT), a student-led and faculty-supported organization at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. SCRT's evaluation of each pre-clinical course is composed of a comprehensive three-step process: a review of course evaluation data, a Town Hall Meeting and online survey to generate and assess potential solutions, and a thoughtful discussion with course directors. Over the past two years, SCRT has demonstrated the strength of its approach by playing a substantial role in improving medical education, as reported by students and faculty. Furthermore, SCRT's uniquely student-centered, collaborative model has strengthened relationships between students and faculty and is one that could be readily adapted to other medical schools or academic institutions.
