Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37091099›Full record

ArticleImplementation research and practice

Stakeholder perspectives on digital behavioral health applications targeting adolescent depression and suicidality: Policymaker, provider, and community insights.

Ana Radovic, Afton Kirk-Johnson, Morgan Coren, Brandie George-Milford, David Kolko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation research and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Child and adolescent psychiatry: challenges, solutions, opportunities, and future directions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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.

Ana RadovicAdolescent Medicine, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4022-4151
Afton Kirk-JohnsonUPMC Western Psychiatric Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7312-8289
Morgan CorenAdolescent Medicine, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6631-2395
Brandie George-MilfordUPMC Western Psychiatric Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
David KolkoUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Funding

The Center for Enhancing Triage and Utilization for Depression and Emergent Suicidality (ETUDES) in Pediatric Primary CareP50MH115838 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI David A. Brent · 2018 to 2026
$25.5M
CLINICAL RESEARCH TRAINING IN CHILD PSYCHIATRYT32MH018951 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI TINA R GOLDSTEIN · 1990 to 2026
$9.7M
Social Media Intervention for Adolescents with Depression and Anxiety and their Parents to Increase Use of Mental Health ServicesK23MH111922 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI RADOVIC-STAKIC, ANA · 2017 to 2019
$534k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH111922NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH115838NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH018951
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: With adolescent depression and suicidality increasing, technology-based interventions may help address mental health needs. The Enhancing Treatment and Utilization for Depression and Emergent Suicidality (ETUDES) Center supports development of technology interventions to help primary care providers target these problems. To successfully develop and integrate such interventions into primary care, iterative engagement of stakeholders is necessary. This paper outlines our stakeholder engagement process, a qualitative analysis of feedback and outcomes, and how feedback was incorporated to develop Center interventions. Methods: Stakeholder panels represented key end-users of ETUDES Center interventions (adolescents, young adults, parents, and healthcare providers) and their advocates at the organizational/policy level. Meetings were held throughout intervention development and at annual retreats. Detailed meeting notes were collected and summarized by the stakeholder engagement team in real time, after which action items were generated and reviewed by the full research team. Using a content analysis approach, all stakeholder feedback summaries were coded using a prespecified codebook organized by recurring topics. Codes were organized under the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Anonymous stakeholder feedback surveys assessed relevance of topics, meeting effectiveness, and stakeholder involvement. Results: Stakeholder meetings provided feedback on topics such as representation, language, access to care, and stigma. Relevant feedback and recommendations were incorporated into subsequent iterations of the interventions and their implementation. Mean stakeholder ratings of meeting proceedings on a 0-3 Likert scale ranged from 1.70 ( Conclusions: The iterative engagement approach yielded practical feedback from stakeholders about ETUDES Center interventions. The team organized feedback to identify barriers and facilitators to using Center interventions and to generate action items, which were transposed onto components of an implementation strategy, supplemented by the CFIR-ERIC Implementation Strategy Matching Tool. Stakeholder feedback will direct the future development of an integrated intervention and guide further stakeholder engagement in developing technologies for adolescent mental health.

Indexed as

adolescentdepressionstakeholdersuicidalitytechnology

Identifiers

PMID37091099
PMCPMC9924270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.