This is the 6th iteration of the CFHA debate, a forum for wrangling with our evidence-base and best practices. This year’s question is “Does universal behavioral health screening do more harm than good?” One team of debaters will make the case that universal screening is proven by research to improve clinical, operational, and financial outcomes in integrated primary care. The other team will push back, asserting that we’re mandating too much screening, and as a result, overwhelming our systems, burning out our clinicians, and frequently just going through the motions. We’ll look closely at universal screening for depression, anxiety, substance use, intimate partner violence, and trauma. After the debate, the audience will vote to recognize which team made the better case and then we’ll engage the audience to grapple with the realities and best practices for screening at the frontline of patient care.
Daniel Mullin, Professor, UMass Chan Medical SChool Daniel Mullin PsyD, M.P.H.
Eboni Winford, Director of Research and Health Equity, Licensed P, Cherokee Health Systems Eboni Winford PhD, MPH
Hernan Barenboim, Chief Wellness Officer - Director of Behavioral Health, KPC Hernan Barenboim PhD
Jason Herndon, Clinical Psychologist, Individual - Jason Herndon Jason Herndon PsyD
Laura Sudano, Associate Director, Integrated Behavioral Health, UCC San Diego Health Laura Sudano PhD, LMFT
Natalie Levkovich, Associate Professor of Operations Management, Health Federation of Philadelphia Natalie Levkovich MBA, PhD
Ryan Jackman, Medical Director, Intermountain Health Ryan Jackman MD
