ArticleEvidence-based mental health2022
Data sharing in the age of predictive psychiatry: an adolescent perspective.
Article in Evidence-based mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive Pediatric Health Risk Stratification Using an AI-Driven Framework in Children Aged 2 to 8 Years: Design and Validation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Toward a hybrid assessment framework for adolescent borderline personality disorder: a mini review of personality functioning, digital biomarkers, and AI-supported assessment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Ethical and social issues in prediction of risk of severe mental illness: a scoping review and thematic analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Factors that affect clinical youth engagement in digital mental health research: a qualitative sub-study nested within a prospective cohort study.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Observational
- The comprehensive clinical benefits of digital phenotyping: from broad adoption to full impact.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Tracing Tomorrow: young people's preferences and values related to use of personal sensing to predict mental health, using a digital game methodology.BMJ mental health · 2024Article
- A collaborative realist review of remote measurement technologies for depression in young people.Nature human behaviour · 2024Review
- Comparing Attitudes About Genomic Privacy and Data Sharing in Adolescents and Parents of Children Enrolled in a Genomic Research Repository.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2024Article
- Parent attitudes towards data sharing in developmental science.Open research Europe · 2023Article
- Carpe diem.Evidence-based mental health · 2022Article
- Co-created data governance frameworks for youth mental healthcare: Values, principles, and implementation-A scoping review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvances in genetics and digital phenotyping in psychiatry have given rise to testing services targeting young people, which claim to predict psychiatric outcomes before difficulties emerge. These services raise several ethical challenges surrounding data sharing and information privacy.
objectivesThis study aimed to investigate young people's interest in predictive testing for mental health challenges and their attitudes towards sharing biological, psychosocial and digital data for such purpose.
methodsEighty UK adolescents aged 16-18 years took part in a digital role-play where they played the role of clients of a fictional predictive psychiatry company and chose what sources of personal data they wished to provide for a risk assessment. After the role-play, participants reflected on their choices during a peer-led interview.
findingsParticipants saw multiple benefits in predictive testing services, but were highly selective with regard to the type of data they were willing to share. Largely due to privacy concerns, digital data sources such as social media or Google search history were less likely to be shared than psychosocial and biological data, including school grades and one's DNA. Participants were particularly reluctant to share social media data with schools (but less so with health systems).
conclusionsEmerging predictive psychiatric services are valued by young people; however, these services must consider privacy versus utility trade-offs from the perspective of different stakeholders, including adolescents. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Respecting adolescents' need for transparency, privacy and choice in the age of digital phenotyping is critical to the responsible implementation of predictive psychiatric services.
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.