Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34566394›Full record

ArticleCognitive and behavioral practice2021

Rebooting Mental Health Care Delivery for the COVID-19 Pandemic (and Beyond): Guiding Cautions as Telehealth Enters the Clinical Mainstream.

Jonathan S Comer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive and behavioral practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

1 author.

Jonathan S ComerFlorida International University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across the COVID-19 pandemic, we have witnessed perhaps the field's largest and most abrupt transformation in scope of practice. In the context of surging mental health needs and historically limited feasibility of traditional office-based services during the pandemic, telehealth has launched into the clinical mainstream and has become a dominant mode of outpatient mental health care delivery. The articles in this terrific Special Issue outline some of the field's most exciting innovations from the past 18 months. The present commentary discusses how these unprecedented times have prompted unprecedented resourcefulness and innovation in the field. Issues related to evolving and uncertain telehealth regulation and reimbursement policies are discussed, and cautions for the road ahead are offered as we prepare for post-pandemic practices. The commentary concludes with a call to redouble efforts to move beyond the use of telehealth to largely treat only those populations who already enjoyed access to traditional office-based services. Understanding and overcoming barriers to telehealth care and ensuring equitable access to telehealth options are critical steps for actualizing the great potential of telehealth strategies for increasing the reach of supported care to underserved populations.

Indexed as

coronavirusCOVID-19telehealthtelemental healthtreatment innovation

Identifiers

PMID34566394
PMCPMC8452354

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.