Golembiewski Elizabeth, Allen Katie S, Blackmon Amber M, Hinrichs Rachel J, Vest Joshua R
IUPUI Richard M Fairbanks School of Public Health, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Regenstrief Institute, Inc, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2019 Oct 7;5(4):e12846. doi: 10.2196/12846.
Nonclinical determinants of health are of increasing importance to health care delivery and health policy. Concurrent with growing interest in better addressing patients' nonmedical issues is the exponential growth in availability of data sources that provide insight into these nonclinical determinants of health.
This review aimed to characterize the state of the existing literature on the use of nonclinical health indicators in conjunction with clinical data sources.
We conducted a rapid review of articles and relevant agency publications published in English. Eligible studies described the effect of, the methods for, or the need for combining nonclinical data with clinical data and were published in the United States between January 2010 and April 2018. Additional reports were obtained by manual searching. Records were screened for inclusion in 2 rounds by 4 trained reviewers with interrater reliability checks. From each article, we abstracted the measures, data sources, and level of measurement (individual or aggregate) for each nonclinical determinant of health reported.
A total of 178 articles were included in the review. The articles collectively reported on 744 different nonclinical determinants of health measures. Measures related to socioeconomic status and material conditions were most prevalent (included in 90% of articles), followed by the closely related domain of social circumstances (included in 25% of articles), reflecting the widespread availability and use of standard demographic measures such as household income, marital status, education, race, and ethnicity in public health surveillance. Measures related to health-related behaviors (eg, smoking, diet, tobacco, and substance abuse), the built environment (eg, transportation, sidewalks, and buildings), natural environment (eg, air quality and pollution), and health services and conditions (eg, provider of care supply, utilization, and disease prevalence) were less common, whereas measures related to public policies were rare. When combining nonclinical and clinical data, a majority of studies associated aggregate, area-level nonclinical measures with individual-level clinical data by matching geographical location.
A variety of nonclinical determinants of health measures have been widely but unevenly used in conjunction with clinical data to support population health research.
健康的非临床决定因素对医疗服务和卫生政策的重要性日益增加。随着人们越来越关注更好地解决患者的非医疗问题,能够洞察这些健康非临床决定因素的数据源数量呈指数级增长。
本综述旨在描述有关使用非临床健康指标结合临床数据源的现有文献状况。
我们对以英文发表的文章和相关机构出版物进行了快速综述。符合条件的研究描述了将非临床数据与临床数据相结合的效果、方法或必要性,且于2010年1月至2018年4月在美国发表。通过手动检索获取其他报告。由4名经过培训的评审员分两轮筛选记录,并进行评分者间信度检查。从每篇文章中,我们提取了所报告的每个健康非临床决定因素的测量方法、数据源和测量水平(个体或总体)。
本综述共纳入178篇文章。这些文章共报告了744种不同的健康非临床决定因素测量方法。与社会经济地位和物质条件相关的测量方法最为普遍(90%的文章中包含),其次是密切相关的社会环境领域(25%的文章中包含),这反映了诸如家庭收入、婚姻状况、教育程度、种族和民族等标准人口统计测量方法在公共卫生监测中的广泛可得性和使用情况。与健康相关行为(如吸烟、饮食、烟草和药物滥用)、建成环境(如交通、人行道和建筑物)、自然环境(如空气质量和污染)以及卫生服务和条件(如护理提供者供应、利用情况和疾病患病率)相关的测量方法较不常见,而与公共政策相关的测量方法则很少见。在结合非临床和临床数据时,大多数研究通过匹配地理位置将总体、地区层面的非临床测量方法与个体层面的临床数据相关联。
各种健康非临床决定因素测量方法已被广泛但不均衡地与临床数据结合使用,以支持人群健康研究。