What question did this study set out to answer?

This study aims to evaluate how well standardized social determinants of health screeners capture patient social needs compared to assessments by trained Community Health Workers.

May 31, 2026Open Access

Convergence and differences across social needs identified through structured screeners and clinical assessments

Key Points

This study aims to evaluate how well standardized social determinants of health screeners capture patient social needs compared to assessments by trained Community Health Workers.
Observational study utilizing deidentified health record data from NYC Health + Hospitals (January-December 2023).
Adult primary care patients completed both a standardized SDOH screener and a semi-structured assessment by a Community Health Worker.
Analysis included calculating the proportion of patients with identified needs and assessing concordance between the two tools.
51.4% of patients reported ≥1 social need on both instruments, while 43.3% reported needs only to CHWs.
CHWs identified higher rates of food insecurity (35.4% vs 10.7%), transportation needs (28.2% vs 11%), and legal assistance (23.8% vs 6.8%) compared to the screener.
Conversational assessments revealed unmet social needs that were not captured by standard screeners.

Abstract

AbstractIntroduction Health related social needs, such as food, transportation, and housing insecurity, influence health outcomes. While standardized social determinants of health (SDOH) screeners are increasingly used in clinical settings, it remains unclear how well these tools capture patient needs compared with conversational assessments conducted by trained staff like Community Health Workers (CHWs). Methods This observational study was conducted using deidentified electronic health record data from NYC Health + Hospitals between January 1 and December 31, 2023. Adult primary care patients (≥21 years) completed both the system's standardized SDOH screener and a CHW-led semi-structured assessment. Assessments covered 10 domains: housing insecurity, housing quality, food insecurity, transportation, childcare, education, financial assistance, insurance or medical cost help, legal assistance, and employment. The proportion of patients with ≥1 identified need and concordance across instruments were calculated. Results Among 2,077 patients who completed both instruments, 58.3% were female, 42.5% Hispanic/Latinx, 41.1% Black or African American, with a mean (SD) age of 58 (14.5) years; 33% were uninsured and 26.9% had Medicaid. Overall, 51.4% reported ≥1 social need on both instruments, 43.3% reported ≥1 need only to a CHW, and 1.8% reported ≥1 need only on the screener. CHWs identified higher rates of food insecurity (35.4% vs 10.7%), transportation needs (28.2% vs 11%), and legal assistance (23.8% vs 6.8%) compared with the screener. Conclusions and Relevance Patients disclosed social needs to CHWs at substantially higher rates than on structured screeners, suggesting that conversational, relationship-based assessments reveal unmet needs not captured through standardized tools. Policies relying solely on structured SDOH screening may underestimate social needs. Allowing clinical assessments to complement or substitute for screeners could improve identification and linkage to resources.

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zein et al. (Fri,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bcf835783ba022b6fb8fc https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2026.108442

Bookmark

View Full Paper