Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29515468›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2018

eHealth in Treatment of Offenders in Forensic Mental Health: A Review of the Current State.

Hanneke Kip, Yvonne H A Bouman, Saskia M Kelders, Lisette J E W C van Gemert-Pijnen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Bringing Technology to Justice-Involved Youth.Research on child and adolescent psychopathology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hanneke KipCentre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.
Yvonne H A BoumanDepartment of Research, Stichting Transfore, Deventer, Netherlands.
Saskia M KeldersCentre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.
Lisette J E W C van Gemert-PijnenCentre for eHealth and Wellbeing Research, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands.
University of Twente · NLNorth-West University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment of offenders in forensic mental health is complex. Often, these in- or outpatients have low treatment motivation, suffer from multiple disorders, and have poor literacy skills. eHealth may be able to improve treatment outcomes because of its potential to increase motivation and engagement, and it can overcome the predominant one-size-fits-all approach by being tailored to individual patients.

objectiveTo examine its potential, this systematic review studies the way that eHealth has been used and studied in forensic mental health and identifies accompanying advantages and disadvantages for both patients and treatment, including effectiveness.

methodsA systematic search in Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science was performed up until December 2017. Studies were included if they focused on technological interventions to improve the treatment of forensic psychiatric patients.

resultsThe search resulted in 50 studies in which eHealth was used for treatment purposes. Multiple types of studies and technologies were identified, such as virtual reality, web-based interventions, and videoconferencing. The results confirmed the benefits of technology, for example, the acquisition of unique information about offenders, effectiveness, and tailoring to specific characteristics, but indicated that these are not fully taken advantage of. DISCUSSION: To overcome the barriers and obtain the benefits, eHealth has to have a good fit with patients and the forensic psychiatric context. It has to be seamlessly integrated in existing care and should not be added as an isolated element. To bridge the gap between the current situation and eHealth's potential, further research on development, implementation, and evaluation should be conducted.

Indexed as

eHealthforensic psychiatryinterventionsoffenderstechnology

Identifiers

PMID29515468
PMCPMC5826338
OpenAlexW2788310953

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.