ArticleJAMIA open2025
Development and validation of computable social phenotypes for health-related social needs.
Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance of 4 Methods to Assess Health-Related Social Needs.JAMA network open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Measurement of health-related social needs (HRSNs) is complex. We sought to develop and validate computable phenotypes (CPs) using structured electronic health record (EHR) data for food insecurity, housing instability, financial insecurity, transportation barriers, and a composite-type measure of these, using human-defined rule-based and machine learning (ML) classifier approaches. Materials and Methods: We collected HRSN surveys as the reference standard and obtained EHR data from 1550 patients in 3 health systems from 2 states. We followed a Delphi-like approach to develop the human-defined rule-based CP. For the ML classifier approach, we trained supervised ML (XGBoost) models using 78 features. Using surveys as the reference standard, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and area under the curve (AUC). We compared AUCs using the Delong test and other performance measures using McNemar's test, and checked for differential performance. Results: Most patients (63%) reported at least one HRSN on the reference standard survey. Human-defined rule-based CPs exhibited poor performance (AUCs=.52 to .68). ML classifier CPs performed significantly better, but still poor-to-fair (AUCs = .68 to .75). Significant differences for race/ethnicity were found for ML classifier CPs (higher AUCs for White non-Hispanic patients). Important features included number of encounters and Medicaid insurance. Discussion: Using a supervised ML classifier approach, HRSN CPs approached thresholds of fair performance, but exhibited differential performance by race/ethnicity. Conclusion: CPs may help to identify patients who may benefit from additional social needs screening. Future work should explore the use of area-level features via geospatial data and natural language processing to improve model performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.