Faculty Bibliography

IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:Health-related social needs (HRSN) influence health outcomes and health care utilization. Clinicians face challenges addressing HRSN due to limited skills, expertise, and time. Further insight is needed on how patients and clinicians navigate HRSN in clinical encounters. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:This study examines outpatient primary care encounters predating widespread HRSN screening to identify how discussions on HRSN are initiated and addressed. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:This qualitative analysis was conducted on transcripts of 97 audiotaped English-speaking patient encounters from 3 clinics in New York City within a municipal health care system from January 2011 through April 2015. Patients were eligible if they were older than 18 years, self-identified as Black or White, had a diagnosis of hypertension, and had at least one prior encounter with the participating clinician. Codes were developed from social needs domains addressed by the Accountable Health Communities HRSN Screening Tool. Codes were added for further social needs identified, whether a patient or clinician initiated the HRSN discussion, and how a social need was addressed, if at all. Encounters were analyzed between June 2023 and February 2024. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Characterization of the content and nature of HRSN discussions during clinical encounters within safety-net clinics. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 97 patients (55 [56.7%] women, 58 [59.8%] Black, mean [SD] age, 59.7 [10.6] years) had audiotaped encounters with 27 clinicians (18 [66.7%] women, 15 [55.6%] White, mean [SD] age, 36 [5.8] years). Physical activity (36% of encounters), financial strain (35%), mental health (34%), and substance use (28%) were the most discussed HRSN domains across the 97 encounters. Patients introduced financial strain most often (70% of the time), while clinicians led substance use (75%), physical activity (51%) and mental health (51%) discussions. Patients initiated conversations on employment (77%), food insecurity (62%), and housing instability (52%). Interventions included prescriptions, forms, counseling, and referrals. Domains frequently intervened on included health care navigation needs (85% of discussions), substance use (33%), and mental health (27%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:In this qualitative study of HRSN discussions in primary care encounters, clinicians were more likely to initiate discussions on substance use, physical activity, and mental health, behaviors routinely assessed in primary care, but different from topics introduced by patients. Findings underscore the need for standardized screening to improve identification of domains less frequently addressed by clinicians. Additional interventions are also needed, including clinician training for how to address HRSN in resource-constrained settings and integration of other health care team members, to enhance HRSN identification and intervention.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The goal of this case report is to detail experiences and challenges experienced in the training of Primary Care residents in secondary analysis using All of Us Researcher Workbench. At our large, urban safety net hospital, Primary Care/Internal Medicine residents in their third year undergo a research intensive block, the Research Practicum, where they work as a team to conduct secondary data analysis on a dataset with faculty facilitation. In 2023, this research block focused on use of the All of Us Researcher Workbench for secondary data analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Two groups of 5 residents underwent training to access the All of Us Researcher Workbench, and each group explored available data with a faculty facilitator and generated original research questions. Two blocks of residents successfully completed their research blocks and created original presentations on "social isolation and A1C" levels and "medical discrimination and diabetes management." RESULTS:Departmental faculty were satisfied with the depth of learning and data exploration. In focus groups, some residents noted that for those without interest in performing research, the activity felt extraneous to their career goals, while others were glad for the opportunity to publish. In both blocks, residents highlighted dissatisfaction with the degree to which the All of Us Researcher Workbench was representative of patients they encounter in a large safety net hospital. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Using the All of Us Researcher Workbench provided residents with an opportunity to explore novel questions in a massive data source. Many residents however noted that because the population described in the All of Us Researcher Workbench appeared to be more highly educated and less racially diverse than patients they encounter in their practice, research may be hard to generalize in a community health context. Additionally, given that the data required knowledge of 1 of 2 code-based data analysis languages (R or Python) and work within an idiosyncratic coding environment, residents were heavily reliant on a faculty facilitator to assist with analysis. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Using the All of Us Researcher Workbench for research training allowed residents to explore novel questions and gain first-hand exposure to opportunities and challenges in secondary data analysis.