Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31584124›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2019

Adapting Evidence-Based Treatments for Digital Technologies: a Critical Review of Functions, Tools, and the Use of Branded Solutions.

Peter W Tuerk, Cindy M Schaeffer, Joseph F McGuire, Margo Adams Larsen, Nicole Capobianco, John Piacentini

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Peter W TuerkSheila C. Johnson Center for Clinical Services, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. pwt3g@virginia.edu.
Cindy M SchaefferDivision of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University of Maryland-Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Joseph F McGuireDivision of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Margo Adams LarsenResearch Division, Virtually Better Inc., Decatur, GA, USA.
Nicole CapobiancoDepartment of Human Services, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
John PiacentiniUCLA Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Funding

Pegasys VR: Integrating Virtual Humans in the Treatment of Child Social AnxietyR42MH094019 · NIMH · VIRTUALLY BETTER, INC. · PI BEIDEL, DEBORAH C, TUERK, PETER · 2014 to 2016
$2.1M
OC-Go: Facilitating fidelity and dissemination of evidence based treatment for childhood OCD via an interactive crowd-sourced patient-provider toolR42MH111277 · NIMH · VIRTUALLY BETTER, INC. · PI PIACENTINI, JOHN C., TUERK, PETER · 2017 to 2019
$1.7M
NIMH NIH HHS R42 MH094019NIMH NIH HHS R42 MH111277
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewWe provide a critical review of digital technologies in evidence-based treatments (EBTs) for mental health with a focus on the functions technologies are intended to serve. The review highlights issues related to clarity of purpose, usability, and assumptions related to EBT technology integration, branding, and packaging. RECENT

findingsDevelopers continue to use technology in creative ways, often combining multiple functions to convey existing EBTs or to create new technology-enabled EBTs. Developers have a strong preference for creating and investigating whole-source, branded solutions related to specific EBTs, in comparison to developing or investigating technology tools related to specific components of behavior change, or developing specific clinical protocols that can be delivered via existing technologies. Default assumptions that new applications are required for each individual EBT, that EBTs are best served by the use of only one technology solution rather than multiple tools, and that an EBT-specific technology product should include or convey all portions of an EBT slow scientific progress and increase risk of usability issues that negatively impact uptake. We contend that a purposeful, functions-based approach should guide the selection, development, and application of technology in support of EBT delivery.

Indexed as

MarketingBehavioral ResearchBiomedical TechnologyEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMental DisordersDigitaleHealthEvidence-based treatmentMental healthMobile applicationsTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID31584124

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.