Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33211024›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2020

Technology-Enabled Solutions for Australian Mental Health Services Reform: Impact Evaluation.

Haley M LaMonica, Alyssa Milton, Katharine Braunstein, Shelley C Rowe, Antonia Ottavio, Tanya Jackson, Michael A Easton, Ashlea Hambleton, Ian B Hickie, Tracey A Davenport

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Evaluation of the Use of Digital Mental Health Platforms and Interventions: Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Gaps in the Dynamics and Performance of the Psychiatric Care Deinstitutionalization.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Haley M LaMonicaBrain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6563-5467
Alyssa MiltonBrain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4326-0123
Katharine BraunsteinInnoWell, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1032-9080
Shelley C RoweBrain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8501-4457
Antonia OttavioInnoWell, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8307-6200
Tanya JacksonInnoWell, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8159-7421
Michael A EastonInnoWell, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3672-6957
Ashlea HambletonInnoWell, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6912-0911
Ian B HickieBrain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8832-9895
Tracey A DavenportBrain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4218-9238
Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-Oncology · AUThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth information technologies (HITs) are becoming increasingly recognized for their potential to provide innovative solutions to improve the delivery of mental health services and drive system reforms for better outcomes.

objectiveThis paper describes the baseline results of a study designed to systematically monitor and evaluate the impact of implementing an HIT, namely the InnoWell Platform, into Australian mental health services to facilitate the iterative refinement of the HIT and the service model in which it is embedded to meet the needs of consumers and their supportive others as well as health professionals and service providers.

methodsData were collected via web-based surveys, semistructured interviews, and a workshop with staff from the mental health services implementing the InnoWell Platform to systematically monitor and evaluate its impact. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact tests, and a reliability analysis were used to characterize the findings from the web-based surveys, including variability in the results between the services. Semistructured interviews were coded using a thematic analysis, and workshop data were coded using a basic content analysis.

resultsBaseline data were collected from the staff of 3 primary youth mental health services (n=18), a counseling service for veterans and their families (n=23), and a helpline for consumers affected by eating disorders and negative body image issues (n=6). As reported via web-based surveys, staff members across the services consistently agreed or strongly agreed that there was benefit associated with using technology as part of their work (38/47, 81%) and that the InnoWell Platform had the potential to improve outcomes for consumers (27/45, 60%); however, there was less certainty as to whether their consumers' capability to use technology aligned with how the InnoWell Platform would be used as part of their mental health care (11/45, 24% of the participants strongly disagreed or disagreed; 15/45, 33% were neutral; and 19/45, 42% strongly agreed or agreed). During the semistructured interviews (n=3) and workshop, participants consistently indicated that the InnoWell Platform was appropriate for their respective services; however, they questioned whether the services' respective consumers had the digital literacy required to use the technology. Additional potential barriers to implementation included health professionals' digital literacy and service readiness for change.

conclusionsDespite agreement among participants that HITs have the potential to result in improved outcomes for consumers and services, service readiness for change (eg, existing technology infrastructure and the digital literacy of staff and consumers) was noted to potentially impact the success of implementation, with less than half (20/45, 44%) of the participants indicating that their service was ready to implement new technologies to enhance mental health care. Furthermore, participants reported mixed opinions as to whether it was their responsibility to recommend technology as part of standard care.

Indexed as

community-based participatory researchevaluation methodologyhealth care reformmental healthmobile phonetechnology

Identifiers

PMID33211024
PMCPMC7714649
OpenAlexW3035498955

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.