Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMartin, Matthew P.
dc.contributor.authorMcEntee, Mindy L.
dc.contributor.authorMullin, Daniel J.
dc.contributor.authorSuri, Yash
dc.contributor.authorvan Eeghen, Constance
dc.date2022-08-11T08:08:06.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T15:42:27Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T15:42:27Z
dc.date.issued2022-06-02
dc.date.submitted2022-07-11
dc.identifier.citation<p>Martin MP, McEntee ML, Mullin D, Suri Y, van Eeghen C. Patient screening for integrated behavioral health in adult primary care: A rapid review of effective procedures. Fam Syst Health. 2022 Jun 2. doi: 10.1037/fsh0000700. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35653737. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/fsh0000700">Link to article on publisher's site</a></p>
dc.identifier.issn1091-7527 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1037/fsh0000700
dc.identifier.pmid35653737
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/26852
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: Although many primary care clinics screen for behavioral health (BH) conditions using validated tools, it is not clear whether adult BH screening leads to better patient outcomes. Our objective was to determine the evidence base by reviewing effectiveness research for multiple strategies of BH screening in adult primary care identified in the Practice Integration Profile. METHOD: We conducted five rapid reviews of effectiveness research supporting BH screening strategies cited in the Practice Integration Profile. Each rapid review was conducted using an adapted REAL (Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature) methodology and a standardized search tailored for each screening strategy to identify evidence related to BH screening in primary care. RESULTS: The database search yielded 931 references. Following eligibility review and extraction, we evaluated data from 20 references examining five screening strategies. Results demonstrated limited support for all five strategies and high risk of bias within most studies. Outcomes associated with various BH screening strategies were rarely the focus of study. CONCLUSIONS: There is an absence of robust, well-structured evidence supporting many of the BH screening strategies advocated for in primary care. Stakeholders may wish to understand how to ensure value when developing a robust screening program that will improve patient health outcomes. Future research should advance the science of BH screen selection, timing, and implementation by answering new questions about screening strategies.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=35653737&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p>
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.1037/fsh0000700
dc.subjectbehavioral medicine
dc.subjectdelivery of health care
dc.subjectintegrated
dc.subjectprimary health care
dc.subjectrapid review
dc.subjectscreening
dc.subjectAlternative and Complementary Medicine
dc.subjectBehavioral Medicine
dc.subjectHealth Psychology
dc.subjectHealth Services Administration
dc.subjectHealth Services Research
dc.subjectIntegrative Medicine
dc.subjectMental and Social Health
dc.subjectPrimary Care
dc.subjectPsychiatry and Psychology
dc.titlePatient screening for integrated behavioral health in adult primary care: A rapid review of effective procedures
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleFamilies, systems and health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/cipc/114
dc.identifier.contextkey30166392
html.description.abstract<p>PURPOSE: Although many primary care clinics screen for behavioral health (BH) conditions using validated tools, it is not clear whether adult BH screening leads to better patient outcomes. Our objective was to determine the evidence base by reviewing effectiveness research for multiple strategies of BH screening in adult primary care identified in the Practice Integration Profile.</p> <p>METHOD: We conducted five rapid reviews of effectiveness research supporting BH screening strategies cited in the Practice Integration Profile. Each rapid review was conducted using an adapted REAL (Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature) methodology and a standardized search tailored for each screening strategy to identify evidence related to BH screening in primary care.</p> <p>RESULTS: The database search yielded 931 references. Following eligibility review and extraction, we evaluated data from 20 references examining five screening strategies. Results demonstrated limited support for all five strategies and high risk of bias within most studies. Outcomes associated with various BH screening strategies were rarely the focus of study.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: There is an absence of robust, well-structured evidence supporting many of the BH screening strategies advocated for in primary care. Stakeholders may wish to understand how to ensure value when developing a robust screening program that will improve patient health outcomes. Future research should advance the science of BH screen selection, timing, and implementation by answering new questions about screening strategies.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathcipc/114
dc.contributor.departmentCenter for Integrated Primary Care
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record