Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33725578›Full record

ArticlePsychiatry research2021

Implementation lessons from the transition to telehealth during COVID-19: a survey of clinicians and young people from youth mental health services.

Jennifer Nicholas, Imogen H Bell, Andrew Thompson, Lee Valentine, Pinar Simsir, Holly Sheppard, Sophie Adams

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatry research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
26.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer NicholasOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: Jen.nicholas@unimelb.edu.au.
Imogen H BellOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia.
Andrew ThompsonOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia.
Lee ValentineOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia.
Pinar SimsirOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia.
Holly SheppardOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia.
Sophie AdamsOrygen, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia; Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne, 35 Poplar Rd, Parkville, 3052, VIC, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUOrygen · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whilst telehealth may overcome some traditional barriers to care, successful implementation into service settings is scarce, particularly within youth mental health care. This study aimed to leverage the rapid implementation of telehealth due to COVID-19 to understand the perspectives of young people and clinicians on how telehealth impacts service delivery, service quality, and to develop pathways for future uses. Youth mental health service users (aged 12-25) and clinicians took part in an online survey exploring service provision, use, and quality following the adoption of telehealth. Service use data from the period were also examined. Ninety-two clinicians and 308 young people responded to the survey. Service use was reduced compared to the same period in 2019, however, attendance rates were higher. Across eight domains of service quality, the majority of young people reported that telehealth positively impacted service quality, and were significantly more likely to rate telehealth as having a positive impact on service quality than clinicians. There was high interest in continuing to use telehealth as part of care beyond the pandemic, supporting its permanent role in youth mental health care for a segment of service users. Future work should explore how best to support its long-term implementation.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareAdolescentAdultChildCOVID-19Delivery of Health CareDiffusion of InnovationFemaleHumansMaleMental Health ServicesPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineYoung AdultDigital mental healthMental healthTelehealthYoung people

Identifiers

PMID33725578
PMCPMC9754759
OpenAlexW3134713026

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.