Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35814864›Full record

ArticleIEEE pervasive computing

Peer Support Specialists and Service Users' Perspectives on Privacy, Confidentiality, and Security of Digital Mental Health.

Maria D Venegas, Jessica M Brooks, Amanda L Myers, Marianne Storm, Karen L Fortuna

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE pervasive computing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Guidelines to Establish an Equitable Mobile Health Ecosystem.Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2023
    Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria D VenegasDepartment of Veterans Affairs GRECC, Bedford, VA, 01730, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2740-2267
Jessica M BrooksUniversity of Wisconin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53701, USA.
Amanda L MyersRivier University, Nashua, NH, 03060, USA.
Marianne StormUniversity of Stavanger, 4007 Stavanger, Norway.
Karen L FortunaDartmouth College, Hanover, NH, 21076, USA.
Dartmouth College · USGeriatric Research Education and Clinical Center · USMolde University College · NORivier University · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Peer-Delivered and Technology-Assisted Integrated Illness Management and RecoveryK01MH117496 · NIMH · DARTMOUTH-HITCHCOCK CLINIC · PI FORTUNA, KAREN L. · 2019 to 2023
$615k
NIMH NIH HHS K01 MH117496
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the digitalization of mental health systems progresses, the ethical and social debate on the use of these mental health technologies has seldom been explored among end-users. This article explores how service users (e.g., patients and users of mental health services) and peer support specialists understand and perceive issues of privacy, confidentiality, and security of digital mental health interventions. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted among service users (n = 17) and peer support specialists (n = 15) from a convenience sample at an urban community mental health center in the United States. We identified technology ownership and use, lack of technology literacy including limited understanding of privacy, confidentiality, and security as the main barriers to engagement among service users. Peers demonstrated a high level of technology engagement, literacy of digital mental health tools, and a more comprehensive awareness of digital mental health ethics. We recommend peer support specialists as a potential resource to facilitate the ethical engagement of digital mental health interventions for service users. Finally, engaging potential end-users in the development cycle of digital mental health support platforms and increased privacy regulations may lead the field to a better understanding of effective uses of technology for people with mental health conditions. This study contributes to the ongoing debate of digital mental health ethics, data justice, and digital mental health by providing a first-hand experience of digital ethics from end-users' perspectives.

Identifiers

PMID35814864
PMCPMC9267391
OpenAlexW4214928397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.