Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 16;3(10):e2021201. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.21201

Table 3. Unadjusted and Adjusted Associations Between Social Risk Factors and Interest in Receiving Assistance, Stratified by Response to Social Risk Screening Questionsa.

Variable Participants with positive screening results for ≥1 social risk factor (n = 550) Participants with negative screening results for all social risk factors (n = 301)
Unadjusted OR (95% CI) P value Adjusted OR (95% CI) P value Unadjusted OR (95% CI) P value Adjusted OR (95% CI) P value
Participant characteristics
Age range, y
18-44 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
45-64 0.79 (0.50-1.26) .32 1.03 (0.67-1.58) .91 1.22 (0.48-3.09) .68 3.88 (0.67-22.35) .13
≥65 0.61 (0.37-1.00) .05 1.20 (0.70-2.05) .51 0.92 (0.40-2.11) .85 2.10 (0.42-10.43) .36
Race/ethnicity
Non-Hispanic White 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Non-Hispanic Black 3.78 (2.00-7.17) <.001 2.22 (1.37-3.60) .001 1.94 (1.08-3.49) .03 0.57 (0.18-1.88) .36
Hispanic 1.95 (1.34-2.85) .001 0.74 (0.29-1.91) .53 2.99 (1.02-8.81) .05 1.51 (0.27-8.51) .64
Non-Hispanic other race or multiple races 2.05 (1.10-3.80) .02 1.36 (0.76-2.44) .30 3.39 (0.80-14.28) .10 1.43 (0.27-7.58) .67
Preferred language
English 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Spanish 1.55 (0.90-2.66) .12 2.20 (0.97-4.97) .06 2.45 (1.24-4.82) .01 2.58 (0.49-4.70) .17
Educational level, y
<12 1.84 (1.20-2.82) .005 1.46 (0.81-2.65) .21 1.01 (0.29-3.54) .99 0.21 (0.02-2.18) .19
≥12 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Household income, $
Missing 10.74 (3.89-29.70) <.001 3.93 (1.06-14.57) .04 2.67 (0.49-14.61) .26 2.23 (0.22-22.06) .49
0-10 000 34.13 (17.2-67.58) <.001 7.78 (2.96-20.44) <.001 10.40 (3.91-27.65) <.001 12.38 (2.94-52.15) .001
10 001-25 000 12.16 (4.70-31.43) <.001 3.90 (1.19-12.75) .03 10.76 (5.06-22.86) <.001 11.48 (2.44-53.94) .002
25 001-50 000 12.16 (6.06-24.43) <.001 5.45 (2.49-11.96) <.001 2.36 (0.36-15.34) .37 3.40 (0.41-28.37) .26
50 001-75 000 3.62 (1.00-13.01) .05 2.37 (0.59-9.51) .22 1.78 (0.41-7.74) .44 1.37 (0.28-6.77) .70
≥75 001 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Self-reported health or caregiver-reported child’s health
Excellent, very good, or good 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Fair or poor 1.66 (1.03-2.69) .04 1.50 (0.92-2.46) .11 2.95 (1.53-5.71) .001 4.22 (1.09-16.31) .04
Participant type
Adult patient 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Adult caregiver of pediatric patient 2.03 (1.12-3.68) .02 1.35 (0.52-3.50) .53 1.51 (0.53-4.25) .44 2.60 (0.66-10.32) .17
Trust in clinician
Complete (rating of 10) 0.76 (0.48-1.19) .23 1.13 (0.64-1.99) .66 0.43 (0.12-1.55) .20 0.56 (0.08-4.11) .57
High (rating of 8-9) 0.72 (0.44-1.17) .19 1.31 (0.77-2.23) .31 0.49 (0.20-1.17) .11 0.70 (0.18-2.69) .60
Medium to low (rating of 1-7) 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Any previous experience with discrimination in a health care setting
Yes 0.98 (0.71-1.35) .89 0.71 (0.48-1.05) .09 1.58 (0.57-4.38) .38 1.37 (0.25-7.55) .71
No 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Order of response to survey questions
Answered questions about social risk factors first 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Answered question about interest in receiving assistance first 1.22 (0.85-1.76) .27 1.48 (1.05-2.07) .02 1.76 (0.66-4.67) .26 1.52 (0.49-4.70) .47
Social risk screening
No. of risk factorsb 2.86 (2.15-3.82) <.001 2.40 (1.68-3.42) <.001 NA NA NA NA
Any exposure to social risk screening in health care setting within past 12 mo
Yes 1.78 (1.01-3.14) .05 1.42 (0.90-2.26) .14 1.26 (0.50-3.16) .63 2.35 (1.47-3.74) <.001
No 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Any social risk assistance in health care setting within past 12 mo
Yes 3.98 (2.57-6.15) <.001 1.66 (0.97-2.82) .06 4.36 (0.99-19.29) .05 2.00 (0.42-9.45) .38
No 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Any discomfort with questions in any screening domain
Yes 2.54 (1.26-5.10) .009 1.43 (0.54-3.75) .47 3.63 (0.81-16.20) .09 5.75 (0.64-51.58) .12
No 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Perceptions of appropriateness of health care–based social risk screening
Very appropriate or somewhat appropriate 1.04 (0.73-1.50) .81 0.74 (0.44-1.25) .26 2.19 (0.74-6.43) .16 3.69 (1.08-12.55) .04
Neither, very inappropriate, or somewhat inappropriate 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Comfort with integrating social risk data into EHR
Completely comfortable or somewhat comfortable 1.49 (0.92-2.42) .11 1.48 (0.90-2.45) .13 0.70 (0.29-1.69) .43 0.42 (0.08-2.22) .31
Neither, completely uncomfortable, or somewhat uncomfortable 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Health care setting
Primary care 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
Emergency department 1.47 (0.72-3.02) .30 1.39 (0.69-2.79) .35 2.55 (1.03-6.32) .04 4.27 (1.59-11.45) .004
Participants with public insurance or no insurance, %
<80 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA 1 [Reference] NA
≥80 2.23 (1.15-4.34) .02 1.62 (0.73-3.57) .24 2.50 (0.91-6.86) .07 1.91 (0.74-4.90) .18

Abbreviations: EHR, electronic health record; NA, not applicable; OR, odds ratio.

a

The table shows all variables included in the adjusted analyses. Models were run as logistic regressions with clustered SEs that were categorized by clinical site. Sample size presented is the size after listwise deletion. Among participants interested in assistance, those excluded from the regression model were older and more likely to be Hispanic, to speak Spanish, to have lower educational levels and household income, and to report discomfort with answering the social risk screening questions (eTable 7 in the Supplement). Among participants not interested in assistance, those excluded from the regression model were older and more likely to be adult patients (vs adult caregivers), to have lower educational levels, to have been recruited from a primary care setting, and to report that health care–based social risk screening was less appropriate (eTable 7 in the Supplement).

b

The number of risk factors ranged from 0 to 5.