Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30617570›Full record

ArticleDer Nervenarzt2019

[Internet and mobile-assisted interventions in mental disorders : Implementation in Germany from an ethical perspective].

Giovanni Rubeis, Florian Steger

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Digital interventions for refugees. Challenges, opportunities, and perspectives ofEthik in der Medizin : Organ der Akademie fur Ethik in der Medizin · 2021
    Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Giovanni RubeisInstitut für Geschichte, Theorie und Ethik der Medizin, Universität Ulm, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Deutschland. giovanni.rubeis@uni-ulm.de.
Florian StegerInstitut für Geschichte, Theorie und Ethik der Medizin, Universität Ulm, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternet and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for mental disorders are seen by some authors as a step forward to narrow the treatment gap in mental health; however, especially in Germany professionals voice ethical concerns against the implementation of IMIs. The fact that there is broad evidence in favor of IMIs and that IMIs have already been implemented in several countries requires an ethical analysis to answer these concerns.

objectiveThe objective is to tackle ethical issues connected to a possible implementation of IMIs for mental disorders in Germany and to point out possible solutions. MATERIAL AND

methodsWe conducted an ethical analysis using the criteria of well-being of patients, non-maleficence, justice, and patient autonomy, based on the empirical evidence. RESULTS AND

conclusionThe ethical analysis showed that IMIs for mental disorders principally have a positive effect on the well-being of patients and have a low risk of impairment. Additionally, IMIs can minimize risk, improve justice, and strengthen autonomy of mentally ill patients. Despite the broad evidence, there are still research desiderates with respect to ethical aspects, e. g. patient information for mentally ill patients.

Indexed as

Ethical AnalysisInternetMental DisordersPersons with Psychiatric DisordersGermanyHumansMental HealthAutonomyEthicsInternet-based interventions for mental healthJusticeMobile-based interventions for mental healthNon-maleficenceWell-being of patients

Identifiers

PMID30617570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.