ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Evaluating Redundancy and Biases in EHR Social Determinants of Health Data Screening.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Healthcare organizations have begun incorporating screening procedures for social determinants of health (SDOH) into care, recognizing the impact these factors can have on health outcomes. We aimed to present methods for evaluating redundancy in the risk information gained across SDOH questions and for evaluating whether demographic biases are present in whether patients were asked SDOH questions and whether they declined to answer them. Methods: SDOH question data were analyzed for 1.8 million UNC Health patients. To evaluate risk information redundancy, response agreement was analyzed for pairs of questions. Demographic biases were evaluated using logistic regression models. Results: Risk information redundancy was identified, particularly across food and financial insecurity questions. Furthermore, female and White patients were more likely to be asked some questions than other groups, and American Indian or Alaska Native and Hispanic or Latino patients were less likely to decline to answer questions. Conclusions: We demonstrated methods healthcare organizations can use to evaluate their SDOH screening procedures. These methods yielded insights for (1) reducing burden in clinical workflows by identifying where redundancy could be eliminated and (2) reducing bias in SDOH data collection through more systematic screening protocols.
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.