ArticleCommunity mental health journal2020
Whose System is it Anyway? How Clients and Providers Evaluate the Impact of Session EHR Use on Communication in Mental Health Treatment.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Service Users' Perspectives on an Integrated Electronic Care Record in Mental Health Care: Qualitative Vignette and Interview Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Impact of Electronic Health Records on Information Practices in Mental Health Contexts: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Sharing Clinical Notes and Electronic Health Records With People Affected by Mental Health Conditions: Scoping Review.JMIR mental health · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electronic health records are common in mental health settings. While providers often express concern that in-session computing will damage client-provider communication, some work suggests that clients do not share this worry. As the majority of this research has been conducted in medical settings, less is known about how clients evaluate in session computing in mental health treatment, and whether this pattern of discordance persists in this setting. This study describes and compares the perceived impact of in-session computing on communication in mental health treatment from the clients and provider perspective, and examined sources of variation in client ratings. Thirteen providers and 53 clients participated in this study, representing 53 unique client-provider dyads. Results suggest that providers perceived in-session computing as more harmful to communication than clients. Client ratings varied by race, age and visit type but were not influenced by how often the computer was used during session.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31802323What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.