Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38718172›Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2024

Application of the Delphi method to the development of common data elements for social drivers of health: A systematic scoping review.

Yulia A Levites Strekalova, July D Nelson, Haley M Weber, Xiangren Wang, Sara M Midence

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yulia A Levites StrekalovaDepartment of Health Services Research, Management, and Policy, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, 1225 Center Drive, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6060-1233
July D NelsonDepartment of Health Services Research, Management, and Policy, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, 1225 Center Drive, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Haley M WeberDepartment of Health Services Research, Management, and Policy, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, 1225 Center Drive, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Xiangren WangDepartment of Health Services Research, Management, and Policy, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, 1225 Center Drive, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Sara M MidenceDepartment of Health Services Research, Management, and Policy, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, 1225 Center Drive, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.

Funding

Urgent Competitive Revision to Existing NIH Grants and Cooperative Agreements (Urgent Supplement - Clinical Trial Optional)U24MD015970 · NIMHD · MOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Sandra Perreira Chang, Elizabeth O. Ofili · 2020 to 2026
$20.6M
NCATS NIH HHS U24MD015970NIH HHSNIMHD NIH HHS U24 MD015970
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collaborative data science requires standardized, harmonized, interoperable, and ethically sourced data. Developing an agreed-upon set of elements requires capturing different perspectives on the importance and feasibility of the data elements through a consensus development approach. This study reports on the systematic scoping review of literature that examined the inclusion of diverse stakeholder groups and sources of social drivers of health variables in consensus-based common data element (CDE) sets. This systematic scoping review included sources from PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, WoS MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases. Extracted data included the stakeholder groups engaged in the Delphi process, sources of CDE sets, and inclusion of social drivers data across 11 individual and 6 social domains. Of the 384 studies matching the search string, 22 were included in the final review. All studies involved experts with healthcare expertise directly relevant to the developed CDE set, and only six (27%) studies engaged health consumers. Literature reviews and expert input were the most frequent sources of CDE sets. Seven studies (32%) did not report the inclusion of any demographic variables in the CDE sets, and each demographic SDoH domain was included in at least one study with age and sex assigned at birth included in all studies, and social driver domains included only in four studies (18%). The Delphi technique engages diverse expert groups around the development of SDoH data elements. Future studies can benefit by involving health consumers as experts.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueConsensusHumansSocial Determinants of HealthStakeholder Participationcommon data elementsDelphi techniquePhenX core collectionsocial drivers of healthstakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID38718172
PMCPMC11208287

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.