Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33302254›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2020

Patient Attitudes Toward Telepsychiatry During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide, Multisite Survey.

Daniel Guinart, Patricia Marcy, Marta Hauser, Michael Dwyer, John M Kane

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Client perspectives: Telehealth for mental health services.Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Patient and provider attitudes toward video and phone telemental health care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.Clinical psychology : a publication of the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Digitalising mental health care: Practical recommendations from the European Psychiatric Association.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2023
    Review

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Daniel GuinartDepartment of Psychiatry, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5078-6716
Patricia MarcyVanguard Research Group, Glen Oaks, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9428-1231
Marta HauserVanguard Research Group, Glen Oaks, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2883-9775
Michael DwyerAmbulatory Care Division, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5258-1730
John M KaneDepartment of Psychiatry, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2628-9442

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic and its associated movement restrictions forced a rapid and massive transition to telepsychiatry to successfully maintain care continuity.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to examine a large number of patients' experiences of, use of, and attitudes toward telepsychiatry.

methodsAn anonymous 11-question survey was delivered electronically to 14,000 patients receiving telepsychiatry care at 18 participating centers across 11 US states between the months of April and June 2020, including questions about their age and length of service use, as well as experience and satisfaction with telepsychiatry on a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze and report data.

resultsIn total, 3070 patients with different age ranges participated. The overall experience using telepsychiatry was either excellent or good for 1189 (82.2%) participants using video and 2312 (81.5%) using telephone. In addition, 1922 (63.6%) patients either agreed or strongly agreed that remote treatment sessions (telephone or video) have been just as helpful as in-person treatment. Lack of commute (n=1406, 46.1%) and flexible scheduling/rescheduling (n=1389, 45.5%) were frequently reported advantages of telepsychiatry, whereas missing the clinic/hospital (n=936, 30.7%) and not feeling as connected to their doctor/nurse/therapist (n=752, 24.6%) were the most frequently reported challenges. After the current pandemic resolves, 1937 (64.2%) respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that they would consider using remote treatment sessions in the future.

conclusionsTelepsychiatry is very well perceived among a large sample of patients. After the current pandemic resolves, some patients may benefit from continued telepsychiatry, but longitudinal studies are needed to assess impact on clinical outcomes and determine whether patients' perceptions change over time.

Indexed as

attitudeCOVID-19mental healthpatientssurveytelehealthtelemedicinetelepsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID33302254
PMCPMC7758084

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.