ArticlePloS one2021
Service user experiences and views regarding telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A co-produced framework analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The impact of remote care approaches on continuity in primary care: a mixed-studies systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Pooled it
- Implementation strategies for telemental health: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Implementation, Adoption, and Perceptions of Telemental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Model of integrated mental health video consultations for people with depression or anxiety in primary care (PROVIDE-C): assessor masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Trial
- Online remote behavioural intervention for tics in 9- to 17-year-olds: the ORBIT RCT with embedded process and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Trial
- Choosing Virtual Versus In-Person Mental Health Crisis Care: A Theoretical Framework for the Decision-Making Process From the Patient's Perspective.Scandinavian journal of caring sciences · 2026Article
- Shifting to online and telephone bereavement support provision during the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods study of bereavement service provider perspectives and lessons learnt for current practice.Palliative medicine · 2026Article
- Digital exclusion in healthcare services: a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2026Review
- Online Peer Support for Long-Term Conditions: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Barriers and limitations to the development of a telemental health service for workers in Peru- A user-centered approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- A Qualitative Description Study of the Patient's Experience With Community-Based Virtual Crisis Care in Canada: Illustrating the Potential Positives and Negatives of Remote Support on Recovery.Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- Remote mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic in Finland and the Netherlands: a qualitative study.Discover mental health · 2024Article
- Impact of Digital Inclusion Initiative to Facilitate Access to Mental Health Services: Service User Interview Study.JMIR mental health · 2024Article
- Reintroducing face-to-face support alongside remote support to form a hybrid stop smoking service in England: a formative mixed methods evaluation.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Changes in mental health services in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in high-income countries: a rapid review.BMC psychiatry · 2024Review
- Environmental Factors for Sustained Telehealth Use in Mental Health Services: A Mixed Methods Analysis.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2024Article
- A qualitative exploration of the psychosocial needs of people living with long-term conditions and their perspectives on online peer support.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Determinants of Patient Use and Satisfaction With Synchronous Telemental Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2023Review
- Evaluation of telepsychiatry during the COVID-19 pandemic across service users, carers and clinicians: an international mixed-methods study.BMJ mental health · 2023Article
- Mental Health Client Experiences of Telehealth in Aotearoa New Zealand During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons and Implications.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prominence of telemental health, including providing care by video call and telephone, has greatly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there are clear variations in uptake and acceptability, and concerns that digital exclusion may exacerbate previous inequalities in access to good quality care. Greater understanding is needed of how service users experience telemental health, and what determines whether they engage and find it acceptable.
methodsWe conducted a collaborative framework analysis of data from semi-structured interviews with a sample of people already experiencing mental health problems prior to the pandemic. Data relevant to participants' experiences and views regarding telemental health during the pandemic were identified and extracted. Data collection and analysis used a participatory, coproduction approach where researchers with relevant lived experience, contributed to all stages of data collection, analysis and interpretation of findings alongside clinical and academic researchers.
findingsThe experiences and preferences regarding telemental health care of the forty-four participants were dynamic and varied across time and settings, as well as between individuals. Participants' preferences were shaped by reasons for contacting services, their relationship with care providers, and both parties' access to technology and their individual preferences. While face-to-face care tended to be the preferred option, participants identified benefits of remote care including making care more accessible for some populations and improved efficiency for functional appointments such as prescription reviews. Participants highlighted important challenges related to safety and privacy in online settings, and gave examples of good remote care strategies they had experienced, including services scheduling regular phone calls and developing guidelines about how to access remote care tools. DISCUSSION: Participants in our study have highlighted advantages of telemental health care, as well as significant limitations that risk hindering mental health support and exacerbate inequalities in access to services. Some of these limitations are seen as potentially removable, for example through staff training or better digital access for staff or service users. Others indicate a need to maintain traditional face-to-face contact at least for some appointments. There is a clear need for care to be flexible and individualised to service user circumstances and preferences. Further research is needed on ways of minimising digital exclusion and of supporting staff in making effective and collaborative use of relevant technologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.