During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States’ insufficient data infrastructure exposed the most socially marginalized and vulnerable populations, showing the true extent of existing structural health care disparities. These populations are at a greater risk for physical, social, and financial harm; however, our understanding of these harms often comes from weak data sources, anecdotes, experiences of single institutions, and indirect data taken from the United States Census.
In a recent study,1 researchers used data from the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s COVID-19 in Oncology Registry to compare cancer treatment delays with various factors like demographic factors, disease-related factors, and social determinants of health (SDOH).
Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, multimorbidity, and timing of COVID-19 diagnosis were all associated with delays of treatment. Other SDOH,such as United States Census tract-level racial and ethnic make-up, median household income, health insurance level, and education level were studied, but no significant relation was found between SDOH factors and treatment delays.
SDOH data are often collected by public health agencies, the UnitedStates Census Bureau, and other groups. However, these data are often incomplete due to limited regulations that govern data collection and inconsistent use of data standards. Health care professionals find themselves lacking this information and trying to pursue it raises a number of problems.
First, SDOH data, at its best, offers indirect inferences about what patients are experiencing. Certain disparities can be concluded, but little is said about exact proximal or distal cause of the disparity. Attenuation bias, inaccuracies, and misclassification bias are often a result of the unit of measurement becoming more distant from individual patients.
Second, there are delays between collection and reporting. Additionally, data use agreements, anonymization, and institutional review board approvals that need to be put in place cause further delays. With this slow process, many situations caused by SDOH, like employment, change before data can even be registered, making it even harder to study this data.
“Further, efforts at value-based care require data to be translated into actionable insights far sooner than in the encounter-based fee-for-service business model. Indeed, by replacing fee-for-service with episode-based payments, historic value-based payment models inherently
incentivize health systems to address the negative externalities brought on by SDOH,” researchers wrote.
New value-based models are prioritizing a focus on health equity, a necessity for securing accurate data on population groups and social needs. Innovations in health information technology are making the collection of real-time data more attainable. Regulations that limit researchers from analyzing data andcirculating findings need to be reduce by architects of healthy systems data.
Securing patient-level data are essential as these data are vital to understanding the interaction between SDOH factors of different levels. Understanding these interactions can result in more precisely targeted interventions. Routine, prospectively collected, systematic, patient-reported assessments is the future of understanding patient health, with both patients and physicians exchanging critical safety information and valuable data.
“Collecting more comprehensive and longitudinal SDOH data and making it concurrently available for use in both designing clinical care programs and informing research implies the creation of a learning health system… An architectural design that can support clinical care, quality improvement, and research as integrated activities will require harmonizing terminology, a shared vision across stakeholders, strong partnerships, and funding, but the payoff will be well worth it,” researchers concluded.
Reference
1. Mullangi S, Aviki E, Hershman D. Reexamining social determinants of health data collection in the COVID-19 era. Jama Oncol. Published online October 27, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.4543
Social Determinants of Health Data Collection Needs Improvement
Collecting data on social determinants of health carries a number of issues and needs to be improved to create learning health systems.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States’ insufficient data infrastructure exposed the most socially marginalized and vulnerable populations, showing the true extent of existing structural health care disparities. These populations are at a greater risk for physical, social, and financial harm; however, our understanding of these harms often comes from weak data sources, anecdotes, experiences of single institutions, and indirect data taken from the United States Census.
In a recent study,1 researchers used data from the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s COVID-19 in Oncology Registry to compare cancer treatment delays with various factors like demographic factors, disease-related factors, and social determinants of health (SDOH).
Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, multimorbidity, and timing of COVID-19 diagnosis were all associated with delays of treatment. Other SDOH,such as United States Census tract-level racial and ethnic make-up, median household income, health insurance level, and education level were studied, but no significant relation was found between SDOH factors and treatment delays.
SDOH data are often collected by public health agencies, the UnitedStates Census Bureau, and other groups. However, these data are often incomplete due to limited regulations that govern data collection and inconsistent use of data standards. Health care professionals find themselves lacking this information and trying to pursue it raises a number of problems.
First, SDOH data, at its best, offers indirect inferences about what patients are experiencing. Certain disparities can be concluded, but little is said about exact proximal or distal cause of the disparity. Attenuation bias, inaccuracies, and misclassification bias are often a result of the unit of measurement becoming more distant from individual patients.
Second, there are delays between collection and reporting. Additionally, data use agreements, anonymization, and institutional review board approvals that need to be put in place cause further delays. With this slow process, many situations caused by SDOH, like employment, change before data can even be registered, making it even harder to study this data.
“Further, efforts at value-based care require data to be translated into actionable insights far sooner than in the encounter-based fee-for-service business model. Indeed, by replacing fee-for-service with episode-based payments, historic value-based payment models inherently
incentivize health systems to address the negative externalities brought on by SDOH,” researchers wrote.
New value-based models are prioritizing a focus on health equity, a necessity for securing accurate data on population groups and social needs. Innovations in health information technology are making the collection of real-time data more attainable. Regulations that limit researchers from analyzing data andcirculating findings need to be reduce by architects of healthy systems data.
Securing patient-level data are essential as these data are vital to understanding the interaction between SDOH factors of different levels. Understanding these interactions can result in more precisely targeted interventions. Routine, prospectively collected, systematic, patient-reported assessments is the future of understanding patient health, with both patients and physicians exchanging critical safety information and valuable data.
“Collecting more comprehensive and longitudinal SDOH data and making it concurrently available for use in both designing clinical care programs and informing research implies the creation of a learning health system… An architectural design that can support clinical care, quality improvement, and research as integrated activities will require harmonizing terminology, a shared vision across stakeholders, strong partnerships, and funding, but the payoff will be well worth it,” researchers concluded.
Reference
1. Mullangi S, Aviki E, Hershman D. Reexamining social determinants of health data collection in the COVID-19 era. Jama Oncol. Published online October 27, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.4543
FDA Approves mRNA Vaccine for Epstein-Barr Virus-Related Cancer
May 10th 2024WGc-043 is the first and only vaccine approved for this use.
Reach Your Business Goals in 2021
March 25th 2021In part 1 of our podcast series with American Associated Pharmacies (AAP), AAP President and CEO Jon Copeland dives into key pharmacy industry trends.
Pharmacogenetic Testing Recommendations Needed in Clinical Guidelines to Increase Consistency
May 2nd 2024A review found that many guidelines that recommended pharmacogenetic testing were inconsistent between clinical associations.
ThoughtSpot Series: Closing the Healthcare Gap
January 7th 2021Our final episode in our ThoughtSpot 2020 podcast series features NPhA president Dr. Ryan Marable and immediate past president Dr. Lakesha Butler, who share insights on health disparities and the social determinants of health.
Navigating Ethical, Financial Considerations When Delivering Cancer Care
April 30th 2024“I think in those situations where you can use the lower cost of the drug, you should, because it's going to help the overall societal perspective. That begins to break down, though, when that low-cost drug is the one that you're losing money on,” said Scott Soefje in a Q&A on balancing cost and margin at a site of care.
Exploring Ethical Decision-Making in Oncology Pharmacy
April 29th 2024A Q&A with Karen Fancher, PharmD, associate professor of pharmacy practice at Duquesne University School of Pharmacy, on applying ethical principles to manage complex situations in oncology pharmacy.
FDA Approves mRNA Vaccine for Epstein-Barr Virus-Related Cancer
May 10th 2024WGc-043 is the first and only vaccine approved for this use.
Reach Your Business Goals in 2021
March 25th 2021In part 1 of our podcast series with American Associated Pharmacies (AAP), AAP President and CEO Jon Copeland dives into key pharmacy industry trends.
Pharmacogenetic Testing Recommendations Needed in Clinical Guidelines to Increase Consistency
May 2nd 2024A review found that many guidelines that recommended pharmacogenetic testing were inconsistent between clinical associations.
ThoughtSpot Series: Closing the Healthcare Gap
January 7th 2021Our final episode in our ThoughtSpot 2020 podcast series features NPhA president Dr. Ryan Marable and immediate past president Dr. Lakesha Butler, who share insights on health disparities and the social determinants of health.
Navigating Ethical, Financial Considerations When Delivering Cancer Care
April 30th 2024“I think in those situations where you can use the lower cost of the drug, you should, because it's going to help the overall societal perspective. That begins to break down, though, when that low-cost drug is the one that you're losing money on,” said Scott Soefje in a Q&A on balancing cost and margin at a site of care.
Exploring Ethical Decision-Making in Oncology Pharmacy
April 29th 2024A Q&A with Karen Fancher, PharmD, associate professor of pharmacy practice at Duquesne University School of Pharmacy, on applying ethical principles to manage complex situations in oncology pharmacy.